AMD will release the Ryzen 7900, 7700, and 7600 sans the X In January
Click here to post a comment for AMD will release the Ryzen 7900, 7700, and 7600 sans the X In January on our message forum
moab600
AMD gave up on low end market for now it seems
H83
The low end market is supposed to be served by APUs, but AMD has been very slow updating those.
The lack of releases on the low end is really baffling...
Alessio1989
low market is apus or older gpu generations. of course ryzen 7000 IGP sucks so that's a huge hole so far.
Kaarme
Maybe the low end is being taken over by OEMs and laptops entirely? OEM PC makers often use mobile components anyway in the smaller desktops, even if we aren't talking about the NUC size. Mobile chips aren't that bad anymore, these days, especially if there's a cooler any beefier than a laptop could ever sport. There could be some PCIe and such limitations and probably not more than two RAM slots, but if we are talking about lower end, it hardly matters.
Vananovion
Given the platform cost of the 7000 series, there is no reason for low end products in the line for now. As for older chips, I guess mid-range is the new low-end nowadays. Sub 100E there are the R3 4100 and 4500, but you can have R5 5600 or R5 5600G for around 150E.
H83
You make a good point about low end being replaced by other alternatives.
And you`re also correct about mobile chips being good enough for most people, i`ve bought a LG laptop on black friday with a Ryzen 5625U with 16Gb of RAM and that thing is two or three times faster than my @7600K! And all in a small laptop case with weak cooling, on a case with a decent cooler, with would be even better.
The weak point seems to be the integrated graphics.
But are there similar processors for low end desktops?
schmidtbag
Seems to me the low end chips are all BGA, whether for laptops, mini PCs, AIOs, or embedded devices. If you look at how AMD has been making these chips, they're almost all monolithic dies with rather limited capabilities. When you really think about it, I think it makes sense why such chips aren't really being released for AM4 or AM5 anymore. There are 3 priorities people have when buying such chips: efficiency, cost, and size.
A lot of desktop socketed motherboards are built to handle the most high end chips, which means high tolerances for PCIe slots and beefy VRMs. If you have a more purpose-built motherboard, you can use far fewer and far cheaper components, which in turn means a smaller and cheaper motherboard. AMD (and Intel for that matter) are reaching a point where it just doesn't really make sense to put a low-end part in a socketed motherboard, since the span between high and low end is so large that the low-end chips just aren't cost effective.
It also doesn't help that ARM has been creeping its way into the low-end desktop space, which checks the 3 priorities much better than AMD can with a socketed board.
When it comes to OEMs, they tend to lock out which CPUs are compatible with the motherboards, so they can get by with making extra cheap socketed motherboards with low-end CPUs we otherwise might not have access to.
One could argue "why not create another socket for low-end parts" but considering OEMs can cut corners with AM4 and AM5, the profit margins of such products are likely too low for AMD to find that worthwhile. I think there's a reason why AM1 died so quickly.
Lastly, AMD seems to be getting pretty good yields for their chiplets. Perhaps there just simply isn't enough low-quality bins to bother with low-end chips.
user1
am4 fills the low midrange pretty well, the cezanne apus fullfill their role, as they basically have 0 competition for integrated graphics. (the xe graphics suck)
I dont see why amd would rush to release low end on am5 when they are still making and selling am4 parts. the only part they could release would be the ryzen 6000 silicon, but the fact is that mobile is a far more profitable market to allocate those chips.
