Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AMD Discussion
- Thread starter koyoot
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
These all look like mini-itx cases. The problem with these type of cases is that as they start to shrink you are much more limited in your components. You have to use shortened graphics cards, SFX power supplies, small CPU coolers, etc. All of these usually result in some variation of poor air flow, loud and reduced performance.
[doublepost=1496182814][/doublepost]
You may disagree with Apple's decision to focus on building small, compact systems but at least they do it the right way and custom design them for optimal performance and noise.
Apart from specs of diameter of Phanteks Evolv Shift/X: 17x23 cm, there is none. At least, for now. Only, I think, Cryorig Taku has spec sheet on its site.
The In-Win 806, with wood on front, has the same specs as 805 model.
Well the In-Win 806 with wood on front is actually ATX case. Only Gaming Cube prototype with wood on top is mITX case. Shift X and Shift from Phanteks, and Cryorig Taku are also mITX cases. In-Win 806 is supposed to cost slightly more than 805 model(around 200$).
P.S. The Shift, even with its very small form factor will be very good for water cooling setups. You just have to install the AIO's in pull configuration to pull the cool air towards the inside the case, and pull it out, with the exhaust fan in upper part of the case. It reminds me of something, actually
.I think I will make a demo computer for my company needs with this case, and Ryzen 7 + RX Vega water cooled just to attract attention.
Edit: P.S. I think the Phanteks Evolv Shift sizes are pretty similar to overall dimensions of Corsair One computer case.
Last edited:
AMD seems to be particularly relishing the point on PCIe lanes in light of the yesterday’s Intel HEDT announcement, which maxes out at 44 lanes and no chip below $1000 actually has all of them enabled.
apple may be forced to go AMD if they want to have the lanes to drive TB ports with more then 1-2 buses.
apple may be forced to go AMD if they want to have the lanes to drive TB ports with more then 1-2 buses.
Yeah, it will be interesting to see what Apple does here. Lots of tradeoffs to weigh here. Given what we have seen with the skylake-X lineup and what we know of AMD rumors, I think its reasonable to expect that Intel's Xeon lineup will be somewhat higher performing than AMD's counterparts, especially in single threaded tasks. Does Apple stick with Intel for incrementally more performance, despite very high prices but then have to deal with reduced bandwidth. Does Apple stick with a dual GPU config?
Given Apples reliance on thunderbolt 3 and PCIe SSDs, this is actually an issue across the whole lineup. Already the 13" MacBook pro drives 2 TB3 controllers and a SSD through a single 4x PCIe link. Will they be forced to do something like this on higher end desktop computers as well?
If Apple wanted to, I'm sure they could use their massive bank account to convince Intel to open up thunderbolt to them a little sooner.
Technically, Apple can pay Intel for Alpine Ridge controllers for AMD CPUs. But I do not believe they will do this if they can get it for 0 additional $
.I think it's 4x for the SSD, 4x for the left TB3, 2x for the right TB3, 1x for WiFi and bluetooth, and 1x unused.
Yup - and it's worse when you include a dGPU.
Those are the -X versions. The -W probably won't. Just like i7 6800K (28 lanes) versus Xeon E5 1630-1650 v4 (40 lanes ). it is a deliberate market segmentation kneecap that Intel does to the X but doesn't really need to do at to the product that Threadripper would be completing with in more high RAM targeted workstations.
The other problem with Threadripper is that it will be tough to offer sub 8 core models. Also not clear Threadrippers PCI-e lane count are all direct to the central data bus. if talking about including in the intergated southbridge PCIe then -X + X PCH chipset PCI-e is in same range.
do they really need more than 2 buses? And 44 is 4 more which is enough. x16 , x16 , x4 (tb1 ) , x4 (tb2) , x4 (tb3). The question would be why would they want to do that versus x16 , x16 , x4 (tb1) , x4 (tb2) , x4 SSD or x4 slot with a SSD. Two more display ports? Can simply just run those straight out in two mii-DP ports. Unload the SSD off of the PCH and can place things like a 2nd M.2 standard SSD on it and/or a 10GbE controller.
Here we are 4 years after the MP 2013 design and there is still no other system with 3 TB busses. None. It was a slightly dubious idea back in 2013. In 2017, is drifting in the solidly dubious idea zone.
It appears that low end Raven Ridge APUs will have performance slightly lower, or on par with RX 550, and higher end Raven Ridge APUs will have performance between RX 550 and RX 460. Of course the most important part here is RAM speed.
Low End differs from High end through TDP targets. Max Raven Ridge TDP target for desktop is 65W. Lowest - 15W. Banded Kestrel goes from 4W to 15W.
I think I will be able to build this year most efficient, and quite powerful computer this year, just using 7 parts. SSD, APU, MoBo, Case, RAM, PSU, CPU cooler.
Low End differs from High end through TDP targets. Max Raven Ridge TDP target for desktop is 65W. Lowest - 15W. Banded Kestrel goes from 4W to 15W.
I think I will be able to build this year most efficient, and quite powerful computer this year, just using 7 parts. SSD, APU, MoBo, Case, RAM, PSU, CPU cooler.
Not, for now.
P.S. remember my post about slashing prices of the CPUs by AMD?
https://www.techpowerup.com/233966/amd-trims-prices-of-the-ryzen-7-1700-and-1700x
Expect further price cuts in upcoming months. 1700X is right now best deal...
Where does this come from?
"... AMD claims that Ryzen mobile will offer 50% better CPU performance and 40% better GPU performance than the 7th Generation AMD APU. "
https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Computex-2017-AMD-Demos-Ryzen-Mobile-SoC-Vega-Graphics
You have them pegged higher than the latest dGPU in the entry mobile space. I find the "on par and better than" hard to believe outside of some fairly narrow synthetic benchmarks. Especially with zero HBM (or any other cache). The APU's these are up against in AMD's relative comparison are GCN 3.0 "R7" class (or less), right?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10705...and-am4-analysis-a12-9800-b350-a320-chipset/3
Some benchmarks for RX 550 versus 460 and an Intel HD 530. Let's say the HD 530 is 60% behind the AMD APU GPUs. You then add another 40%. So ballpark a 100% better ( so just 2x the 530 scores on this graphs)
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-550-2gb,5034-4.html
It is much closer... but dominating?
Last edited:
The performance of the Raven Ridge APUs will depend on Memory bandwidth. If you have 3200 MHz 14 ns RAM you will get very good results, especially in 65W TDP APU, which will also have the highest core clocks both on CPU and GPU.
P.S Read again what I have wrote. Slightly slower or on par with RX 550 for low end APU. Between RX 550(512 GCN cores) and 460(896 GCN cores). Is it that impossible with 704 GCN cores on Raven Ridge APU, with fast system Memory? .
P.S.2 https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/870373386391891968
According to them, entry level 16C/32T SKU in Threadripper line will cost 850$.
That would be mind blowing... But not exactly unlikely. Total cost of manufacturing the Ryzen CPU is 40$ for AMD, regardless of the core count, so they are making pretty hefty lot of money on each CPU. Threadripper will not cost more than 100$ for whole package, so they can afford to sell it for just 850$.
P.S Read again what I have wrote
. Slightly slower or on par with RX 550 for low end APU. Between RX 550(512 GCN cores) and 460(896 GCN cores). Is it that impossible with 704 GCN cores on Raven Ridge APU, with fast system Memory? .P.S.2 https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/870373386391891968
According to them, entry level 16C/32T SKU in Threadripper line will cost 850$.
That would be mind blowing... But not exactly unlikely. Total cost of manufacturing the Ryzen CPU is 40$ for AMD, regardless of the core count, so they are making pretty hefty lot of money on each CPU. Threadripper will not cost more than 100$ for whole package, so they can afford to sell it for just 850$.
https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/870388109812355072
Heh, 120$ for package and testing Threadripper CPUs.
http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=290705&postcount=594
Also this is important. Remember when I have said that Ryzen 7 1700 for 250$?.
Basically Core i7 5960X for 1/4th of its price and 60% of power consumption. This will be mind blowing deal...
P.S. If you are interested. Threadripper and Epyc CPUs share the same socket. So if you are interested in Mac Pro with Threadripper and Epyc CPUs - it is easily possible.
Heh, 120$ for package and testing Threadripper CPUs
.http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=290705&postcount=594
Also this is important. Remember when I have said that Ryzen 7 1700 for 250$?
.Basically Core i7 5960X for 1/4th of its price and 60% of power consumption. This will be mind blowing deal...
P.S. If you are interested. Threadripper and Epyc CPUs share the same socket. So if you are interested in Mac Pro with Threadripper and Epyc CPUs - it is easily possible
.
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/870621722051063808
Yields are too high to make good Ryzen 3 CPUs, but eventually we will see them. What I think however about them is that they might be actually APUs instead of 4C/4T CPUs.
P.S. If Ryzen 7 1700 will cost 250$, what do you guys think about 199$ Ryzen 5 1600X?
Yields are too high to make good Ryzen 3 CPUs, but eventually we will see them. What I think however about them is that they might be actually APUs instead of 4C/4T CPUs.
P.S. If Ryzen 7 1700 will cost 250$, what do you guys think about 199$ Ryzen 5 1600X?
Technically, Apple can pay Intel for Alpine Ridge controllers for AMD CPUs. But I do not believe they will do this if they can get it for 0 additional $
I thought Intel had opened up Thunderbolt as a non-exclusive royalty free license scheme? Surely that will allow anyone (with a suitable dev and production time) to produce their own Thunderbolt compatible chips?