Netac NV7000 2 TB NVMe SSD Review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4080 Noctua OC Edition review
MSI Clutch GM51 Wireless mouse review
ASUS ROG STRIX B760-F Gaming WIFI review
Asus ROG Harpe Ace Aim Lab Edition mouse review
SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Headset review
Ryzen 7800X3D preview - 7950X3D One CCD Disabled
MSI VIGOR GK71 SONIC Blue keyboard review
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D processor review
FSP Hydro G Pro 1000W (ATX 3.0, 1000W PSU) review
AMD Ryzen Gets Delidded - And It Is a Tricky Thing to Do
We mentioned in our reviews that you should not delid AMD Ryzen processors for the sheer fact that even the heatspreader has sensors and that it is soldered. Next to that AMD did the cooling part rather well so the benefits of a lower temperatures versus the risk of bricking that processor might not be worth it.
Well, that thesis has been confirmed, pro-overclocker der8auer took a Ryzen 7 1700 (well actually multiple of them) and delidded Ryzen 7 to see what was hiding behind the Integrated Heatspreader (IHS). It took der8auer multiple attemempts to get a succesful delidded processor. To be more precise, it actually it took him three processors hence we can already conclude that the process is very risky.
In the end he succeeded though, in the photos below (clock thumbnails) you can see a Ryzen 7 1700 CPU delidded. You will notice a solder layer that ties directly to the IHS. Looking att he processor you can see multiple capacitors, all nicely covered by some sort of silicone protective layer, so AMD certainly went all the way here.
So what weas the end-reult delidding and cooling ? Well, der8auer shows it in a video, but the he achieved a drop of 2 degrees C lower on overall temperatures with a cooler sitting directly on top of the processor die. In short, and what we have been saying. Please do not delid the processor guys, chances are high you'll damage it and the temperature drop certainly doiesn't justify you bricking the processor or loosing warranty.
Microsoft Windows Bug Is Holding Back AMD Ryzen - 03/10/2017 09:44 AM
We've been adressing the topic widely in our reviews, it makes little sense for Ryzen processors that are that powerful to not perform as well in games in CPU bound situations. Microsoft now sends wo...
Review: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X processor - 03/06/2017 09:34 AM
In this review we take a look at a new Ryzen series processor from AMD. We peek at the Ryzen 7 1800X, a 499 USD processor that has eight cores and 16 threads (SMT). The 8-core processor will be tested...
Review: AMD Ryzen 7 1700X processor - 03/03/2017 02:44 PM
We tested the Flagship processor, now we review the Ryzen 7 1700X Processor that is a 100 bucks cheaper. The 8-core processor will be tested on an X370 motherboard. Read the review here....
Corsair is Ready for AMD Ryzen - 02/28/2017 09:35 PM
Corsair today announced its extensive compatibility for the groundbreaking new range of AMD Ryzen processors and the AM4 platform. With a completely new CPU architecture, chipset and CPU socket, AM...
AMD Ryzen Unboxing video - A peek at the Ryzen 7 1800X Reviewer Kit from AMD - 02/27/2017 06:19 PM
While videos and unboxing videos really aren't our thing (hey geeky looking Dutch guy with bad English accent) some of you have requested an unvoxing video of the AMD Ryzen press kit. We're allowed ...
Variac
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: 2003-12-15
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: 2003-12-15
#5404719 Posted on: 03/10/2017 11:38 AM
If all of the capacitor are covered on a silicon layer they would be all shorted together (and everything to GND I suppose).
Maybe you wanted to say silicone.
If all of the capacitor are covered on a silicon layer they would be all shorted together (and everything to GND I suppose).
Maybe you wanted to say silicone.
Neo Cyrus
Senior Member
Posts: 10484
Joined: 2006-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 10484
Joined: 2006-02-14
#5404720 Posted on: 03/10/2017 11:38 AM
So AMD has done it right in a $300 CPU, while Intel hasn't done it right in 4(?) generations of CPU's now. Broadwell-E processors are better, but still not good enough.
I'm more and more baffled how AMD can offer a CPU with this performance for this price with proper build quality like this as well. Is AMD simply selling these first gen Ryzen CPU's at a ridiculous low price to regain market without making a lot of profit, or is Intel really that overpriced?
Maybe a combination of both.
Intel is really that overpriced. It was a literal monopoly on the high end segment for 11 years. AMD are definitely making a good amount of profit.
As for Intel not soldering their chips, their fans made all the excuses in the world including an article explaining that it would cause micro cracks to the die. Most people completely gobbled that **** up and took it as gospel, believing that the almighty Intel is right yet again. Don't believe those exaggerations, as if micro cracks form spontaneously and instantly the moment you use your CPU and are magically going to kill your CPU. AMD is pretty much proof Intel was lying straight out of their asses again, as usual, as expected.
So AMD has done it right in a $300 CPU, while Intel hasn't done it right in 4(?) generations of CPU's now. Broadwell-E processors are better, but still not good enough.
I'm more and more baffled how AMD can offer a CPU with this performance for this price with proper build quality like this as well. Is AMD simply selling these first gen Ryzen CPU's at a ridiculous low price to regain market without making a lot of profit, or is Intel really that overpriced?
Maybe a combination of both.
Intel is really that overpriced. It was a literal monopoly on the high end segment for 11 years. AMD are definitely making a good amount of profit.
As for Intel not soldering their chips, their fans made all the excuses in the world including an article explaining that it would cause micro cracks to the die. Most people completely gobbled that **** up and took it as gospel, believing that the almighty Intel is right yet again. Don't believe those exaggerations, as if micro cracks form spontaneously and instantly the moment you use your CPU and are magically going to kill your CPU. AMD is pretty much proof Intel was lying straight out of their asses again, as usual, as expected.
CPC_RedDawn
Senior Member
Posts: 9784
Joined: 2008-01-06
Senior Member
Posts: 9784
Joined: 2008-01-06
#5404726 Posted on: 03/10/2017 11:42 AM
So AMD has done it right in a $300 CPU, while Intel hasn't done it right in 4(?) generations of CPU's now. Broadwell-E processors are better, but still not good enough.
I'm more and more baffled how AMD can offer a CPU with this performance for this price with proper build quality like this as well. Is AMD simply selling these first gen Ryzen CPU's at a ridiculous low price to regain market without making a lot of profit, or is Intel really that overpriced?
Maybe a combination of both.
Possibly AMD just wanted to drop these CPU's on the market at this price to regain marketshare. I strongly believe this, I reckon they are making very little on each chip sold and even less on the higher versions too as more time would be put into binning them.
Makes sense, drop these chips now at a great price and make a huge impact on the market, which it really has done. Then in a few months drop the 6c/12t CPU's at a good price point so to make more money on them but still not a lot. Then release the 4c/8t CPU's at high clock speeds and low TDP which I believe they will be making the most money on.
It was a great idea by AMD to out source the chipset to a different company as I dont believe they have the infrastructure to create both architecture and chipset at the same time. But hopefully with as successful as this launch has been and the marketshare they will claw back I hope this will change and AMD can pour some of this money into R&D.
Its not really how much money you make, its how much buzz you create. Which increases market share, which creates decent price margins, Which pleases shareholders, Which increases share prices, Which attracts more investors, Which attracts developers, Which means the company has more money at its disposal.
So AMD has done it right in a $300 CPU, while Intel hasn't done it right in 4(?) generations of CPU's now. Broadwell-E processors are better, but still not good enough.
I'm more and more baffled how AMD can offer a CPU with this performance for this price with proper build quality like this as well. Is AMD simply selling these first gen Ryzen CPU's at a ridiculous low price to regain market without making a lot of profit, or is Intel really that overpriced?
Maybe a combination of both.
Possibly AMD just wanted to drop these CPU's on the market at this price to regain marketshare. I strongly believe this, I reckon they are making very little on each chip sold and even less on the higher versions too as more time would be put into binning them.
Makes sense, drop these chips now at a great price and make a huge impact on the market, which it really has done. Then in a few months drop the 6c/12t CPU's at a good price point so to make more money on them but still not a lot. Then release the 4c/8t CPU's at high clock speeds and low TDP which I believe they will be making the most money on.
It was a great idea by AMD to out source the chipset to a different company as I dont believe they have the infrastructure to create both architecture and chipset at the same time. But hopefully with as successful as this launch has been and the marketshare they will claw back I hope this will change and AMD can pour some of this money into R&D.
Its not really how much money you make, its how much buzz you create. Which increases market share, which creates decent price margins, Which pleases shareholders, Which increases share prices, Which attracts more investors, Which attracts developers, Which means the company has more money at its disposal.
Unilythe
Member
Posts: 78
Joined: 2016-08-22
Member
Posts: 78
Joined: 2016-08-22
#5404734 Posted on: 03/10/2017 11:48 AM
Intel is really that overpriced. It was a literal monopoly on the high end segment for 11 years. AMD are definitely making a good amount of profit.
As for Intel not soldering their chips, their fans made all the excuses in the world including an article explaining that it would cause micro cracks to the die. Most people completely gobbled that **** up and took it as gospel, believing that the almighty Intel is right yet again. Don't believe those exaggerations, as if micro cracks form spontaneously and instantly the moment you use your CPU and are magically going to kill your CPU. AMD is pretty much proof Intel was lying straight out of their asses again, as usual, as expected.
It is true that there are some serious issues with soldering the die to the IHS. of course it's possible, but to do it right is tedious and expensive, because of differing thermal expansion for different materials. Using just one type of metal will definitely damage the die because of the pressure caused by the differing expansions, so the techniques used for soldering requires many different layered and mixed metals, some of which very expensive.
This problem becomes bigger as the dies become smaller, too.
Intel is really that overpriced. It was a literal monopoly on the high end segment for 11 years. AMD are definitely making a good amount of profit.
As for Intel not soldering their chips, their fans made all the excuses in the world including an article explaining that it would cause micro cracks to the die. Most people completely gobbled that **** up and took it as gospel, believing that the almighty Intel is right yet again. Don't believe those exaggerations, as if micro cracks form spontaneously and instantly the moment you use your CPU and are magically going to kill your CPU. AMD is pretty much proof Intel was lying straight out of their asses again, as usual, as expected.
It is true that there are some serious issues with soldering the die to the IHS. of course it's possible, but to do it right is tedious and expensive, because of differing thermal expansion for different materials. Using just one type of metal will definitely damage the die because of the pressure caused by the differing expansions, so the techniques used for soldering requires many different layered and mixed metals, some of which very expensive.
This problem becomes bigger as the dies become smaller, too.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Member
Posts: 78
Joined: 2016-08-22
So AMD has done it right in a $300 CPU, while Intel hasn't done it right in 4(?) generations of CPU's now. Broadwell-E processors are better, but still not good enough.
I'm more and more baffled how AMD can offer a CPU with this performance for this price with proper build quality like this as well. Is AMD simply selling these first gen Ryzen CPU's at a ridiculous low price to regain market without making a lot of profit, or is Intel really that overpriced?
Maybe a combination of both.