Raven Ridge are not for normal users. They are either for casual users or for normal users who are wasting money on an iGPU they don't use.
That might be the competitor, but it does not mean AMD should overcharge too.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AMD Discussion
- Thread starter koyoot
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That might be the competitor, but it does not mean AMD should overcharge too.
Intel has artificially kept the prices high by segregating the mainstream platform from the HEDT (enthusiast) platform.
This has left a door wide open for AMD to bridge this gap.
This has left a door wide open for AMD to bridge this gap.
So why they are pricing enthusiast CPU for mainstream market? Intel prices cheapest 6 core CPU at almost 400$. AMD will price it at not more than 300$. 4 core will cost around 199$. Its mainstream targeted. You maybe confused by the number cores of the CPUs, but the paint on the wall is very clear to read.
Raven Ridge APUs will find massive usage over number of segments. From "normal" users, to server, embedded, machine learning, everywhere.
Edit: Reddit user, who worked with one of suppliers have said this:
Background: I am formerly a purchaser for a computer retailer.
This site is hooked directly into the database for one of the largest "channel" suppliers in the world - Ingram Micro.
Channel suppliers like IM are the means for most vendors to get their products to retailers and system builders. I'm saying places like cyberpowerpc, and even retailers (to an extent Newegg), buy their parts from places like IM.
**These are 100% legit SKUs,** however pricing is not quite realistic. These are flat percentage markups of Ingram Micro's selling price.
Edit: my commentary of pricing got most questions. I'll explain here.
> Meaning to say if we add another 30% markup for retailers,
No, not even close to that much. Mom and pop brick and mortar, probably, that's what they have to do to keep the lights on. But the retailers most of us deal with these days - Newegg, Best Buy, etc - they buy these parts for slightly less than what we're seeing here, and then barely put tiny margins on top of that - and it is not uncommon for them to actually *sell these parts at cost or a loss*, and get their revenue from rebates from the factory. /u/carbonat38 was exactly right when he said "I doubt that margins in the ultra competitive online world are that high anymore, in particular with little actual operating cost."
> How can you tell that the markup is a flat percentage?
Just from my experience when googling an Ingram Micro SKU back in the day to get to a product real fast (channel vendors' websites are, as a rule, ********,** and so you develop your own methods to get to the product). I'd occasionally find a BLT url or a similar drop shipper. As a rule, BLT would have things in a certain line all the same lazy markup over the Ingram price. If Ingram listed a bunch of new logitech keyboards in April 2015, they'd all be 5% higher on BLT. If Ingram listed a bunch of new CPUs in Feb 2017, they'd all be, say, 1% higher on BLT. Making up those numbers, but that's the pattern.
**Ultimately, the pattern from BLT that I am familiar with** means that the 1800X will be $449.99 - 499.99 MSRP, barring any sort of price inflation if we are under supplied.
Get on the train.
So even my information may be not exactly correct, 100%. If the top model will be 500$, its a complete and utter bloodbath.
Last edited:
I still expect the flagship Ryzen to be ~$600 if it's somewhat slower than the Intel Core i7-6900K or ~$700 if it's as fast as or faster then the Intel Core i7-6900K.
As I had said before, Intel has artificially kept prices high by segregating the mainstream platform (eg. LGA 1150) from the HEDT/enthusiast (eg. LGA 2011-v3)
This has left a door wide open for AMD to bridge this gap.
Base, 389$ CPU will be as fast as 6900K if it will have 3.4 GHz core clock...
Other CPUs will only be faster.
We have seen four things at New Horizon event: Transcoding in Handbrake, Rendering using Blender, Gaming in DX12, and gaming and streaming at the same time. In all of them Ryzen at 3.4 GHz core clock was as fast, or faster than 6900K, or 6700K CPUs.
And one more thing. AMD is not exactly pushing the HEDT into mainstream. They are upping the prices of the mainstream, by offering HEDT-like solution in this market.
So far, all the demo have been of highly threaded tasks.
We don't have any idea of its single thread performance.
You can word it however you like, but AMD is making a HEDT solution more affordable by brining down the price of HEDT.
Last edited:
If multithread situation is on Broadwell-E level, what do you think ST performance will be?
Intel could done this years ago. Its just natural evolution of technology, that high-end becomes mainstream, etc. AMD decided to build upon this foundation their brand, again, Like I have mentioned it previously.
For example Intel Skylake-X/E competitor will be just dual Ryzen 8C die connected through MCM, with quad channel memory, and 16 cores.
Yeah, obviously we don't know the actual performance about zen yet but the biggest problem I see is that AMD is going for more slower cores. This is fine and it may even be competitive with Intel's 6+ core chips but I am still of the mind that most consumers benefit from fewer faster cores. I suspect Zen's single threaded performance won't be able to touch Skylake/Kaby Lake.
For instance would Apple put an 8 core zen processor in an iMac if single threaded performance is 20% worse than its existing skylake processor? I bet not.
Clock for clock, we are looking at maximum 5% difference. Actual performance of Ryzen cores is between Haswell and Broadwell.
Here is complete breakdown of the architectures, and differences. Compare cache structures, Decode/cycle, Dispatch/cycle, Load, Store, Int and FP Registers, and Retire Rate and Queue. They are on the same level as Haswell/Broadwell(Broadwell has improved Multithreading compared to Haswell). You can see also why Skylake cores are getting more oomph, compared to previous generations, because they are simply bigger.
Well, there is the Mac Pro if Apple ever decides to update it.
All Zen has to do is be better than Ivy Bridge which is not exactly a high bar to meet.
Sure, but personally I would rather take a $350 4 core 4.5 Ghz Intel 7700k than a $380 8 core 3.8 Ghz AMD zen processor even if they are clock for clock the performance. AMD still has to convince consumers they need more than 2 cores, which is probably the number of cores in the majority of apple machines sold.
Zen has to do better than what Intel is offering. Intel has broadwell-ep now and skylake-EP/W and Kaby Lake-X on the horizon. Of course, "better" is not well defined, since it may very well offer a better value but not better absolute performance.
You also have a history of hyping up AMD products. We only have to wait a few more weeks until Zen hits the market and we will know for sure whether its performance is competitive and if its suitable for the mac. My advice is to lay off the speculation and rumors until then.
It was once, and based on... bad sources.
I suggest looking what I have posted currently, and how it turned out in reality(the only "unknown" right now is the performance of the CPUs. Or is it?).
My only complaint is that you often post rumors as facts. I remember you making some bold performance claims for the RX 480 which turned out not to be true.
Yes, you are correct, I was under the impression, that AMD could not offer anything for high end market, and went too much into wrong places for information. Learned my lesson.
With Ryzen its different situation. So far
.
Exactly!!
Not everyone has moved on to W10.
macOS, on the other hand, might have to support it if Apple uses it in the iMac - or eventually Naples on the nMP.
Not everyone has moved on to W10.
macOS, on the other hand, might have to support it if Apple uses it in the iMac - or eventually Naples on the nMP.
I don't see people complaining that they can't run macOS 10 Leopard on their new Macs.