AMD Ryzen R7, R5 and R3 Processor Line-up listed

by Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 02/04/2017 09:50 AM | source: | 57 comment(s)

Ah yes, a new day a new Ryzen related post! This one is fairly tasty and interesting though as website coolaler is listing the complete line up of AMD Ryzen processors, including names.

Previously we have talked about the R7, R5 and R3 denominators comparable to Core i3, i5 and i7 for the Ryzen product range. From what Coolaler (with an unknown source I would like to add) is listing there will be 17 models released 8C/16T, 6C/12T, 4C/8T, 4C/4T yet weirdly enough, not a 8C/8T. And yes that reads as the number of cores and threads.

AMD R7 is the 8C/16T series with 5 models: R7 1800X, R7 PRO 1800, R7 1700X, R7 1700, R7 PRO 1700 we guess is X is the identifier for unlocked.

Processor	Cores	Threads	Base Clock	Comparable Perf
AMD R7 1800X	8	16	3.0 - 3.6 GHz	Core i7 6900K
AMD R7 Pro 1800	8	16	3.0 - 3.6 GHz
AMD R7 1700X	8	16	3.0 - 3.6 GHz	Core i7 7700K/6800K
AMD R7 1700	8	16	3.0 - 3.6 GHz	Core i7 7700
AMD R7 Pro 1700	8	16	3.0 - 3.6 GHz
AMD R5 1600X	6	12	3.2 - 3.5 GHz	Core i5 7600K
AMD R5 Pro 1600	6	12	3.2 - 3.5 GHz	Core i5 7600
AMD R5 1500	6	12	3.2 - 3.5 GHz	Core i5 7500
AMD R5 Pro 1500	6	12	3.2 - 3.5 GHz
AMD R5 1400X	4	8	3.2 - 3.5 GHz	Core i5 7400
AMD R5 Pro 1400	4	8	3.2 - 3.5 GHz
AMD R5 1300	4	8	3.2 - 3.5 GHz
AMD R5 Pro 1300	4	8	3.2 - 3.5 GHz
AMD R3 1200X	4	4	3.1 - 3.4 GHz
AMD R3 Pro 1200	4	4	3.1 - 3.4 GHz
AMD R3 1100	4	4	3.1 - 3.4 GHz
AMD R3 Pro 1100	4	4	3.1 - 3.4 GHz

Also the the PRO extension is unclear. Final R7 clocks frequencies are unknown but Coolaler is listing 3.0GHz ~ 3.6GHz for the base clocks with we assume up-to 4.0 GHz boost/turbo clocks.

The more mainstream AMD R5 range will see 6C12T and 4C8T processors. Two of the four from a total of 8 models, including R5 1600X, R5 PRO 1600, R5 1500, R5 PRO 1500, R5 1400X, R5 PRO 1400, R5 1300, R5 PRO 1300, you can see an X Version for the 1600 and 1400. Baseclocks will start at 3.2GHz up-to 3.5GHz, with unspecified Turbo frequencies.

Then there is the more entry level AMD R3 range with is 4C4T. Four are the R3 1200X, R3 PRO 1200, R3 1100, R3 PRO 1100, there is one X version, the base clock is 3.1 ~ 3.4GHz with unspecified turbos. Not bad for entry level processors starting at quad core. It does confirm the fact that there will not be any dual-core processors.

From the looks of it AMD Ryzen will become available March 2. All information in this news item remains speculation as we cannot verify how coolaler has obtained this info. Thanks chispy for the news-submit.

Related Stories

AMD Ryzen CPU scores pop up in Ashes Of The Singularity Benchmark Database - 02/03/2017 07:03 PM
Oh man, there is no stopping this hype train is it ? Somebody posted a screenshots of Ashes of the Singularity showing a CPU benchmark run with you guessed it right, an AMD Ryzen entry. You&rsquo;...

AMD Ryzen CPUs to support Windows 7 with drivers - 02/02/2017 06:54 PM
The lads at Computerbase noticed that AMD is hard at work with Ryzen drivers, Windows 7 is also getting fully supported opposed to what Intel is doing (Kaby lake only has full support starting at Wind...

Six Core AMD Ryzen Processors Might Still Possible - 02/02/2017 10:02 AM
So we have posted a thing or two already about Ryzen being released as 4 and 8 core processors. AMD will release an 4 and 8-core model with and without hyper-threading. ...

Noctua presents three special-edition AM4 CPU coolers for AMD Ryzen - 02/01/2017 04:18 PM
Noctua today presented three special-edition models of its award-winning quiet CPU coolers. The new SE-AM4 versions of the NH-D15, NH-U12S and NH-L9x65 are dedicated premium-quality solutions for the ...

Noctua offers free upgrade-kits for AMD Ryzen platform - 01/25/2017 06:23 PM
Here is why we all love Noctua, they will provide users of its CPU coolers with free mounting upgrade kits for the new AM4 socket of AMD's upcoming Ryzen archiitecture. The SecuFirm2 mounting-kits ar...

12 pages « 2 3 4 5 > »

Raider0001
Senior Member

Posts: 509
Joined: 2006-11-25

#5388644 Posted on: 02/04/2017 12:43 PM

So IPC wise if Ryzen is as good or faster than kaby-lake, the only thing Intel would have to do to offer me a better deal - they would have to offer me at least a 6 core 12 threaded part for the same amount of cash as AMD but it has to fit in my skylake socket that i already have.

PrMinisterGR
Senior Member

Posts: 8099
Joined: 2014-09-27

#5388646 Posted on: 02/04/2017 12:48 PM

If zen with 6c/12t will go against intel i5 4c/4t is bad, very bad, worst than vishera. I hope are only rumors.

Or, like, it's the only way to convince people with an Intel fetish to maybe even consider an AMD CPU again. If it is correct, this seems to be a price chart, not a performance chart. All indications show that Zen cores have similar IPC to Broadwell-E cores, and there are hints that when they are working together they are doing so in a better way than the Intel cores. Although I probably won't upgrade my CPU yet (my GPU is the first one to change), I hope that Zen is what it seems to be up to this point.

From the Intel financial report at Deutsche Bank (read it, it's interesting for a lot of things), I got the feeling that Intel has really nothing to actually compete with it until Cannonlake.

Ross C. Seymore (Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc): That’s very helpful. I guess as my follow-up, you talked about the ASPs in answering a prior question. I wondered about the competitive intensity in the PC market. You’re taking a more conservative tack than the third-party vendors are forecasting, but your primary x86 competitor is coming out with a new architecture for the first time in many, many years. So, I wonder whether it’s on the ASP or the unit or the market share side how you’re factoring that into your forecast for the year.

Brian M. Krzanich (Intel Corp): Sure. I would tell you that we always look at this environment and say there’s going to be a competitive risk in the environment. And we’re always focused on really, our own product roadmap and making sure that we have the highest performance product. So, when we look at 2017, we still believe that our product roadmap is truly the best ever it’s been.

Observe the language. He's basically telling them: This is a risky business, there are competitive risks. Then he goes into defensive mode saying "we don't care what they do", then he says that they have the highest performance product, but he gives no nuance to it, like, what does he mean? They have the fastest product per core? The product with the most cores? A 48-core Xeon will be faster than the 32-core Naples, if he means it this way. And a quad core i7 will probably be faster than a quad core Zen, so yeah, they will have the "faster product". Then he ends up by saying that their own 2017 roadmap has been the best roadmap they've ever had. Well, that's not news exactly, that happens every year. Every year's roadmap is better than the previous year one.

Kaarme
Senior Member

Posts: 3361
Joined: 2013-03-10

#5388651 Posted on: 02/04/2017 12:54 PM

I admit, this looks bad when i5 7600 which is fresh model of my 6600 needs additional 2 cores and 8 threads from AMD just to compete. That means Ryzen core is not impressive, it will be slower in -up to 4 threaded games-, or maybe, a tiny bit of chance that this chart does not represent a performance segmentation, it is only a price segmentation which would mean that R3 1200X is good enough to compete with i5 7600...

Intel's brainwashing is strong...

Normally when you want to beat something, you offer more, not the same. But since Intel has been offering the same old stuff year after year, generation after generation, it results in some people thinking that nothing can ever change. The truth that Intel didn't want you to think about is that we should have had 6 core i5s years ago already. The only reason we don't is Intel's greed and lack of ambition in the no-competition environment.

PrMinisterGR
Senior Member

Posts: 8099
Joined: 2014-09-27

#5388656 Posted on: 02/04/2017 01:15 PM

brutlern
Senior Member

Posts: 295
Joined: 2011-02-09

#5388659 Posted on: 02/04/2017 01:23 PM

I am confused. An 8c/16t amd cpu goes up against an 8c/16t intel cpu. That's great, that's what we want to see. But an 8c/16t amd cpu also goes up against a 4c/8t intel cpu? What's going on there? Also 6c/12t dukes is out with 4c/4t? There are so many things wrong with that table, I'm really hoping it's fake.

12 pages « 2 3 4 5 > »

Post New Comment

Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.