ASUS TUF Gaming B760-PLUS WIFI D4 review
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
AMD Ryzen Launches March 2nd
Yes we managed a full day without a Ryzen news! But, a day has passed and some new information popped up. The AMD Ryzen launch date is firm and steady on March 2nd, likely 3PM CEST. Lock that date in your agenda.
The new information was posted earlier today at sweclockers and does confirm the signals we've been hearing for a while now. Obviously there's an AMD Capsaicin event February the 28th. We do expect to see full product announcements that day and then on the 2nd the review embargoes will be lifted, not just for Ryzen but also for the board partners that will be selling motherboards.
At the same day AMD will be launching the X370 and B350 chipsets based motherboards first. Processors wise you'll see three 8-core parts launched with availability on March the 2nd. Some webshops have however listed the 28th, so there remains to be a little confusion there. Motherboards wise a lot has surfaced online already, including details on the flagship Crosshair VI Hero and Prime X370 motherboards.
Processors then:
You will have noticed that the naming has been changed to Series 3 5 and 7 and no longer is it R3, R5 and R7. I do like that subtle simplified change. 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 7 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 7 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 7 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.
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. All these processors would fit Socket AM4 and thus you can use the same motherboard.
| Processor model | Cores/Threads | L3 Cache | TDP | Base | Turbo | Unlocked | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | 8/16 | 16MB | 95W | 3.6GHz | 4.0GHz | Yes | $499 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | 8/16 | 16MB | 95W | 3.4GHz | 3.8GHz | Yes | $389 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 1700 | 8/16 | 16MB | 65W | 3.0GHz | 3.7GHz | Yes | $319 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 1600X | 6/12 | 16MB | 95W | 3.3GHz | 3.7GHz | Yes | $259 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 1500 | 6/12 | 16MB | 65W | 3.2GHz | 3.5GHz | Yes | $229 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 1400X | 4/8 | 8MB | 65W | 3.5GHz | 3.9GHz | Yes | $199 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 1300 | 4/8 | 8MB | 65W | 3.2GHz | 3.5GHz | Yes | $175 |
| AMD Ryzen 3 1200X | 4/4 | 8MB | 65W | 3.4GHz | 3.8GHz | Yes | $149 |
| AMD Ryzen 3 1100 | 4/4 | 8MB | 65W | 3.2GHz | 3.5GHz | Yes | $129 |
AMD Ryzen BoxArt and Capsaicin Event at GDC 2017 - 02/14/2017 10:58 PM
Alright, I've folded, theres not one day without any mention of AMD and Ryzen until it launches I'm afraid. As you guys have seen, several webshops have shown Ryzen processors specs, models and pric...
EU prices listed - AMD Ryzen 7 1800X To Cost 628 EUR - 02/14/2017 05:39 PM
So we have seen several prices for AMD Ryzen already. This time in the Eu they surfaced in price listing as well. A Belgian online retailer has started taking preorders for Ryzen CPUs. ...
AMD Ryzen Info and Clock Frequency Overview - 02/13/2017 01:40 PM
ver 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 of the X models....
Alleged First AMD Ryzen 7 1700X Benchmarks Surface - 02/13/2017 01:33 PM
On several forums some test results from the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X have surfaced, the 8-core processor seems to position itself inbetween the Core i7 6850K and 6900K. Be warned though, there is no valid...
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...
Darkiee
Senior Member
Posts: 479
Joined: 2009-05-12
Senior Member
Posts: 479
Joined: 2009-05-12
#5393796 Posted on: 02/16/2017 06:02 PM
Ah, good news. Now, just fast forwards 2 weeks and...
Ah, good news. Now, just fast forwards 2 weeks and...
Anarion
Senior Member
Posts: 13599
Joined: 2005-08-13
Senior Member
Posts: 13599
Joined: 2005-08-13
#5393800 Posted on: 02/16/2017 06:13 PM
I don't. There's like zero point for current quad core users to get quad core Ryzen chips. They want those people to switch to Ryzen. 8 core Ryzen would be a real upgrade. Also if the yields are good and the chips are more or less flawless then it might take a while before they have enough defective chips to sell 4/6 core CPUs.
I'd find it strange if the 4c and 6c models were to be released much later. I mean, if you look at GPUs, AMD released the entry/mainstream models a year earlier compared to the enthusiast models (Vega no sooner than this May, apparently). What kind of decision making is the company doing if they do the exact opposite with CPUs? They should release all models as soon as possible. While those 8c/16t prices are good (if the IPC is there), they aren't absolutely speaking cheap components (the cheapest costs well over 300 dollars/euros), so they won't attract the masses all over the world.
I don't. There's like zero point for current quad core users to get quad core Ryzen chips. They want those people to switch to Ryzen. 8 core Ryzen would be a real upgrade. Also if the yields are good and the chips are more or less flawless then it might take a while before they have enough defective chips to sell 4/6 core CPUs.
H83
Senior Member
Posts: 4584
Joined: 2009-09-08
Senior Member
Posts: 4584
Joined: 2009-09-08
#5393811 Posted on: 02/16/2017 06:29 PM
Hey, your thinking cap kind of slipped off there, my friend...
AMD is "stupid" like a fox, etc.
You are thinking in Intel-market/pricing terms. The market that AMD is establishing does not exist for Intel cpus--AMD is creating brand new markets (and Intel will be forced to follow suit as you will see.) In Intel's markets, the prices AMD is charging for its top-end cpus lines up with Intel's mid-to-budget cpus. When people see these prices the last thing they will be thinking is that AMD is gouging them, trust me...Yet, even at what appear to be current Intel budget-cpu prices, these high-end Ryzens will deliver 85%+ of Intel's $1k cpu performance, and they will be the most profitable for AMD at the same time. So when you look at the issue correctly, AMD would be stupid *not* to do it exactly this way--might as well capitalize on Intel's price-gouging for as along as it lasts, eh? It won't be lasting that much longer, for certain.
I understand all that but lets face it most of the money comes from the entry/mainstream markert! We all like to drool over high end parts and companies like to sell them because of the fat margins but the lower end parts are what brings on the profits because that´s what 90% of the people can afford. Even Intel makes most of it´s revenue/profits from the Celerons/Pentiums/I3s cpus not from the X99 cpus. Those cpus are important in the server market, for the desktop market they are halo produtcs and a way for Intel to sell leftover server cpus...
If AMD really wants to profit from their 8 core parts, then sell them on the server side because for the desktop market they won´t bring a lot of money...
Hey, your thinking cap kind of slipped off there, my friend...
AMD is "stupid" like a fox, etc.
You are thinking in Intel-market/pricing terms. The market that AMD is establishing does not exist for Intel cpus--AMD is creating brand new markets (and Intel will be forced to follow suit as you will see.) In Intel's markets, the prices AMD is charging for its top-end cpus lines up with Intel's mid-to-budget cpus. When people see these prices the last thing they will be thinking is that AMD is gouging them, trust me...Yet, even at what appear to be current Intel budget-cpu prices, these high-end Ryzens will deliver 85%+ of Intel's $1k cpu performance, and they will be the most profitable for AMD at the same time. So when you look at the issue correctly, AMD would be stupid *not* to do it exactly this way--might as well capitalize on Intel's price-gouging for as along as it lasts, eh? It won't be lasting that much longer, for certain.
I understand all that but lets face it most of the money comes from the entry/mainstream markert! We all like to drool over high end parts and companies like to sell them because of the fat margins but the lower end parts are what brings on the profits because that´s what 90% of the people can afford. Even Intel makes most of it´s revenue/profits from the Celerons/Pentiums/I3s cpus not from the X99 cpus. Those cpus are important in the server market, for the desktop market they are halo produtcs and a way for Intel to sell leftover server cpus...
If AMD really wants to profit from their 8 core parts, then sell them on the server side because for the desktop market they won´t bring a lot of money...
Prince Valiant
Senior Member
Posts: 815
Joined: 2014-02-23
Senior Member
Posts: 815
Joined: 2014-02-23
#5393816 Posted on: 02/16/2017 06:38 PM
I understand all that but lets face it most of the money comes from the entry/mainstream markert! We all like to drool over high end parts and companies like to sell them because of the fat margins but the lower end parts are what brings on the profits because that´s what 90% of the people can afford. Even Intel makes most of it´s revenue/profits from the Celerons/Pentiums/I3s cpus not from the X99 cpus. Those cpus are important in the server market, for the desktop market they are halo produtcs and a way for Intel to sell leftover server cpus...
If AMD really wants to profit from their 8 core parts, then sell them on the server side because for the desktop market they won´t bring a lot of money...
It's been nothing but 'blahblahblah buy this Intel refresh' for the last several years and most people equate i5 with good enough for the money (regardless of which i5 it is). AMD needs to take the performance crown to break that mindset before offering budget stuff.
It's like how people ignore AMD for nVidia because 'power usage, they're the best, etc.' in spite of not actually caring about such things. I've tried to explain to friends why they should just go for an AMD card when it's a substantial performance difference for slightly more, and sometimes the same or less, and they ignore me because 'ohhhhh shiny nVidia'.
I understand all that but lets face it most of the money comes from the entry/mainstream markert! We all like to drool over high end parts and companies like to sell them because of the fat margins but the lower end parts are what brings on the profits because that´s what 90% of the people can afford. Even Intel makes most of it´s revenue/profits from the Celerons/Pentiums/I3s cpus not from the X99 cpus. Those cpus are important in the server market, for the desktop market they are halo produtcs and a way for Intel to sell leftover server cpus...
If AMD really wants to profit from their 8 core parts, then sell them on the server side because for the desktop market they won´t bring a lot of money...
It's been nothing but 'blahblahblah buy this Intel refresh' for the last several years and most people equate i5 with good enough for the money (regardless of which i5 it is). AMD needs to take the performance crown to break that mindset before offering budget stuff.
It's like how people ignore AMD for nVidia because 'power usage, they're the best, etc.' in spite of not actually caring about such things. I've tried to explain to friends why they should just go for an AMD card when it's a substantial performance difference for slightly more, and sometimes the same or less, and they ignore me because 'ohhhhh shiny nVidia'.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 7236
Joined: 2012-11-10
I completely understand what you're saying, but I think context is important here. When it comes to AMD vs Nvidia, anyone who isn't an elitist or a sheep knows that you'll have a good gaming experience with either brand. AMD's main source of revenue for gaming is likely the mainstream market, which also results in the highest yield. Since 1080p@60Hz displays are still pretty much mainstream, I'm guessing AMD's focus is to get themselves out there while Nvidia focuses on the hardcore enthusiasts. Both AMD and Nvidia tend to release low-end products later, since people aren't exactly anxious to see those. Also, I think it's within AMD's interest to just get as many sales as possible in order to get their name out there. It's better to have many satisfied customers than a handful of thrilled ones, when your competition has more customers of every kind.
Meanwhile for CPUs, AMD is struggling hard and they need to distinguish themselves. They have never really had something that could easily or reliably compete with any i7, to the point that they dropped out of the high-end market entirely. They need to defeat any superficial beliefs, so it seems their priority is to outperform just about any i7 Intel has. Most people don't need anything that powerful, but right now it seems all they need to focus on is de-throning Intel. Meanwhile if they released their cheaper products first, people would see that Intel still has i7s that are faster, so people would get bored and move on.
It is annoying though, I personally am tired of waiting and neither the motherboard chipsets or CPUs I'm interested in are being released first.