Enermax Aquafusion 360 review LCS
Intel Core i5 11400F processor review
Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro SL 3600 MHz 32GB review
ASRock Z590 Extreme review
Gigabyte Radeon RX 6700 XT Gaming OC review
Corsair K70 RGB TKL keyboard review
Corsair RM650x (2021) power supply review
be quiet! Silent Loop 2 280mm review
Corsair K55 RGB PRO XT keyboard review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - March 2021
AMD Ryzen Info and Clock Frequency Overview
Over the past week a lot of info on AMD Ryzen surfaced on the web. It is time for a recap, clock frequency overview and a bit of an explanation on the X models.
Ryzen will likely launch with three models. When time passes there will be three tiers with the R7, R5 and R3 denominators comparable to Core i3, i5 and i7 for the Ryzen product range. AMd will launch with three SKUs, the AMD Ryzen R7 1700, AMD Ryzen R7 1700X and AMD Ryzen R7 1800X.
Over the weekend a new rumor was added, the X version would be referred to as XFR technology etc. Personally I doubt it, processors are processors and they have been named quite similar for years. we think the X simply is a short euphemism for Extreme, much like Intel offers Extreme versions of their processors. Extreme versions are binned, tested to be the better parts that can tweak the best. Likely that’s all there is to it.
ALL models will be unlocked, AMD made that bold claim themselves in early January. The X models thus simply are better binned ones with less restrictions on likely voltage.
AMD Ryzen R7 1800X - 499 USD
AMD Ryzen R7 1800X is the flagship processor and it has has 8 cores with 16 threads and is assumed to get a Boost frequency of 4.00 GHz. The boost frequencies are not confirmed, but the indications we have seen the past few weeks would state a 4.0 GHz Turbo and 3.6 GHz base clock. No further data was revealed. Now keep in mind (if the perf is close) a similar 8-core Intel CPU would cost you about 1,200 euros, the cost for the flagship Ryzen R7 1800X processor would be 599.99 euros. These are unlocked (multiplier) processors.
AMD Ryzen R7 1700X - 389 USD
The next AMD Ryzen in line is the R7 1700X, this one would again get 8 cores and 16 threads but this time at a Turbo frequency of 3.80 GHz, so yes this is pretty much the same processor, just with a lower base at 3.4 GHz and Turbo frequency.
AMD Ryzen R7 1700 - 319 USD
Then there is the AMD R7 Ryzen 1700, this would be a top-end CPU for gamers and yes, again you'll receive an 8 core and 16 threads processor. This time at a Turbo frequency of 3.70 GHz, the most notable being that it is the only model that indicates a TDP, which is set as 65W whereas the other two would be 95 Watt parts. The base clock frequency would be 3.0 GHz.
Over the weekend there however has been a new development, some other models have been spotted. I personally do not think the processors listed below aside from the three aforementioned ones will launch anytime soon. Again the above three processors (we think) will launch first.
So later on there could be AMD Ryzen R5 1600X & 1500 – 6 Core, 12 Thread processors in the $229 To $259 price range. Then the AMD Ryzen R5 1400X & 1300 range with 4 Cores, 8 Thread CPUs at 199 To $175. And then the lowest R3 range would see be Ryzen the R3 100X & 1100, these are 4 Core, 4 Thread CPUs with prices in the $149 To $129.
I find the prices on parts that are not yet released to be highly speculative though. For the three release skus the rpices should be pretty spot on.
All these processors would fit Socket AM4 and thus you can use the same motherboard. Below a chart compiled based off the latest info which leaked through Baidu. See screenshots below as well.
| Processor model | Cores/Threads | L3 Cache | TDP | Base | Turbo | Unlocked | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Ryzen R7 1800X | 8/16 | 16MB | 95W | 3.6GHz | 4.0GHz | Yes | $499 |
| AMD Ryzen R7 1700X | 8/16 | 16MB | 95W | 3.4GHz | 3.8GHz | Yes | $389 |
| AMD Ryzen R7 1700 | 8/16 | 16MB | 65W | 3.0GHz | 3.7GHz | Yes | $319 |
| AMD Ryzen R5 1600X | 6/12 | 16MB | 95W | 3.3GHz | 3.7GHz | Yes | $259 |
| AMD Ryzen R5 1500 | 6/12 | 16MB | 65W | 3.2GHz | 3.5GHz | Yes | $229 |
| AMD Ryzen R5 1400X | 4/8 | 8MB | 65W | 3.5GHz | 3.9GHz | Yes | $199 |
| AMD Ryzen R5 1300 | 4/8 | 8MB | 65W | 3.2GHz | 3.5GHz | Yes | $175 |
| AMD Ryzen R3 1200X | 4/4 | 8MB | 65W | 3.4GHz | 3.8GHz | Yes | $149 |
| AMD Ryzen R3 1100 | 4/4 | 8MB | 65W | 3.2GHz | 3.5GHz | Yes | $129 |
AMD Ryzen Won't Get Dedicated Windows 7 Drivers But Is fully Supported - 02/09/2017 05:30 PM
A while ago we posted a new item that AMD would be fabbing specific Windows 7 drivers. As it turns out, that is not the case. The Ryzen processors however are fully supported. Considering that the Ryz...
US Prices of AMD Ryzen Processors Surface As Well - Starts at $316.59 - 02/09/2017 12:37 PM
A good spot from the colleagues at TPU. Yesterday we already showed you the EU prices of the top end R7 Ryzen processors. Now in the USA the prices have surfaced in ShopBLT as well....
AMD Ryzen R7 lineup of 8-core 16-thread CPU Prices Revealed - 02/08/2017 03:59 PM
Not a day goes by without an AMD Ryzen update it seems. In this latest bulletin we can report you that the Euro price for the AMD Ryzen R7 8-core, 16-thread Processor have been spotted. ...
AMD Ryzen 4.2 GHz Processor entry surfaces at Taobao with 28th Feb Availibility - 02/08/2017 12:27 AM
If you visit taobao.com through this link you will notice an entry for Ryzen. Taobao is a Chinese online shopping website similar to eBay, Amazon and owned by the Alibaba Group. The AMD Ryzen proce...
AMD Ryzen Chips 10% Smaller When Compared to Intel Skylake Dies - 02/07/2017 04:14 PM
AMD states its upcoming Ryzen core fits into a 10 percent smaller die area than Intel’s currently shipping second-generation 14nm processor. Analysts and even Intel engineers in the session ...
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 8158
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 8158
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5392576 Posted on: 02/14/2017 06:04 AM
8 cores dude. 8 cores vs 4 cores.
So 1700X is more expensive than 7700K with similar performance...
8 cores dude. 8 cores vs 4 cores.
Amx85
Senior Member
Posts: 333
Joined: 2016-09-28
Senior Member
Posts: 333
Joined: 2016-09-28
#5392579 Posted on: 02/14/2017 06:15 AM
The only problem is the lack of bigger lv2 + lv3 cache, Single threaded Performance is well, between 1st and 2nd gen i5 but multithreaded falls for the lack of that chasche configuration, even Steamroller with lv3 cache could be great
The last excavator-based core, actually approached i5 performance, so things weren't that tragic. Keep in mind they were still at 28nm. I can see them having better IPC under certain situations and worse in others.
The only problem is the lack of bigger lv2 + lv3 cache, Single threaded Performance is well, between 1st and 2nd gen i5 but multithreaded falls for the lack of that chasche configuration, even Steamroller with lv3 cache could be great
patrickisfrench
Junior Member
Posts: 11
Joined: 2015-10-17
Junior Member
Posts: 11
Joined: 2015-10-17
#5392607 Posted on: 02/14/2017 08:28 AM
assuming price is irrelevant, the best performance bet is still a 6950X and a GTX Titan Pascal right now.
assuming price is irrelevant, the best performance bet is still a 6950X and a GTX Titan Pascal right now.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 1596
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 1596
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5392845 Posted on: 02/14/2017 05:50 PM
i do not get some people ....responses like ....ok so more expensive than the 7700 with the same performance .... ok first of all to note we can't know for sure till the review samples are out and hh show us in detail what these puppies are capable off although i would say that all the leaks seem to be indicating the same thing give or take haswell ipc amd her self showed the engineering sample beating the equivalent i7 even with lower clocks than intel (in blender most likely on settings and ideal conditions for amd)even if this is the case the 1700 is coming out on higher clocks than the showcase engineering samples ...and somehow someone can see the prices and say that is more expensive and slower than the 7700 ?
i do not follow the logic here ... what it seems to be the case is very competitive clock to clock performance but double the cores if the leaks are accurate then ryzen is a nobrainer all across the board and about the overclocks well amd cpus where able to achieve some pretty high clocks all across the board on the fx series sure their ipc was bad in comparison but they where also still stuck in 28nm so i am somewhat optimistic that the 4.2-4.4 will be a realistic range on air hopefully for all we know they might be on almost their max already...
now about the architecture changes ... what we see here seems like history repeating itself from pentium 1 to pentium 4 and pentium D intel was pretty much improving the same pentium 1 architecture and amd was competitive with their k6-2 k6-3 they where slower on the same mhz but the price performance was better then the athlons got a lot closer and a lot more closer to intel cpus continuing to close the gap with the athlon xp till they came out with athlon 64 and they trashed this old architecture resulting intel finally changing architecture .... today we see intel sitting on the same architecture for really long time and amd is about to lunch a new athlon xp (ryzen) a cpu architecture that is very competitive and if the claims of the zen+ will have 15% ipc improvement is anywhere near to what it will happen ... we are going to see finally cpu market getting finally interesting again ! .....anyway am i the only one that kind of seeing kind of a history loop here ?
i do not get some people ....responses like ....ok so more expensive than the 7700 with the same performance .... ok first of all to note we can't know for sure till the review samples are out and hh show us in detail what these puppies are capable off although i would say that all the leaks seem to be indicating the same thing give or take haswell ipc amd her self showed the engineering sample beating the equivalent i7 even with lower clocks than intel (in blender most likely on settings and ideal conditions for amd)even if this is the case the 1700 is coming out on higher clocks than the showcase engineering samples ...and somehow someone can see the prices and say that is more expensive and slower than the 7700 ?
i do not follow the logic here ... what it seems to be the case is very competitive clock to clock performance but double the cores if the leaks are accurate then ryzen is a nobrainer all across the board and about the overclocks well amd cpus where able to achieve some pretty high clocks all across the board on the fx series sure their ipc was bad in comparison but they where also still stuck in 28nm so i am somewhat optimistic that the 4.2-4.4 will be a realistic range on air hopefully for all we know they might be on almost their max already...
now about the architecture changes ... what we see here seems like history repeating itself from pentium 1 to pentium 4 and pentium D intel was pretty much improving the same pentium 1 architecture and amd was competitive with their k6-2 k6-3 they where slower on the same mhz but the price performance was better then the athlons got a lot closer and a lot more closer to intel cpus continuing to close the gap with the athlon xp till they came out with athlon 64 and they trashed this old architecture resulting intel finally changing architecture .... today we see intel sitting on the same architecture for really long time and amd is about to lunch a new athlon xp (ryzen) a cpu architecture that is very competitive and if the claims of the zen+ will have 15% ipc improvement is anywhere near to what it will happen ... we are going to see finally cpu market getting finally interesting again ! .....anyway am i the only one that kind of seeing kind of a history loop here ?
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 7656
Joined: 2014-09-27
Still too emotional. Arguing that Intel isn't a well run company and the most successful recent product is iPhone modems is futile. You cited some guy named Bill who proclaims "I connect the dots between the economy and business decisions" based on his 6 years as an "economist" at famous companies Nerco and First Interstate Bank. I don't see CEO, COO, CFO, or even VP on his bio.
I would say Intel's 60B in full year revenue and non-GAAP 13.2 billion in net income justifies a pretty successful operation. Now don't confuse that with consumer-friendly. We are talking about how well a company runs with the companies interests as the guiding principal.
I think most get emotional about Intel because of their desktop market domination. AMD slowed and Intel slowed progress with them while raising prices. We need AMD to pick up even if their product doesn't leap forward.
It has nothing to do with emotion. IBM was doing great in the personal computer space, up until the point it was irrelevant. This is not fossil fuels, farms or mining. It's a cutthroat business. The profit that Intel is posting are all based on the back of the ridiculous profit margins they have in the x86 market. Their "Client" business, which includes units like mobile who where losing up to 4bn per year along with desktop CPUs and chipsets, reported a profit margin of 63%. That's with all the extra losses from the mobile division they piled up with it, so that it wouldn't look so terrible.
Please tell me any investment that Intel has done in the last five years that has had any kind of meaningful return, that could possibly compensate for them losing a conservative 20% of the x86 market, let's say.
AMD needed time to be competitive after the Bulldozer disaster, and Intel has basically been sitting on top of a an automated cash cushion called Sandy and derivatives. Once those margins are gone, it's more or less game over for them, unless they change.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plXoBXFodHI
You watch this yet PrMinister?
The more technical people here might find this interesting as well.
I'll watch later today. Thanks for the link!