It took 25% of their cash reserves to get to this point last quarter. Hoping they have something up their sleeves for a cash infusion or over the hump on the outbound side. Cash flow for them is getting really serious and all these leaks are to get hype rolling to avert attention. Thinking this is their hail marry pass.

wow 2 new sockets in less then year year for amd?

wow 2 new sockets in less then year year for amd?

This is enterprise not consumer socket.

From where all these cores coming from ?!? I can't believe that AMD with 10 X smaller RD budget than intel manages to kick in 16 cores with 2.5X reduced price.What kind of sorcery is this ?!

And it looks like they are only just starting... - 8 cores in the mainstream. - 16 cores in HEDT - 32 cores in servers - 4 and 8 core APU with Desktop like gpu performance in notebooks ? - up to 48 cores on 7nm by end of 2018 ??? IF they manage beat 1080ti with Vega it would be nice. Now If AMD could match/beat even Volta that would be something. 31 May really can't come soon enough because right now I am not really sure what to expect.

A reason to upgrade my 5820K?? Honestly after what I seen today I no longer excited for HEDT Ryzen It wont be cheap, regular most expensive Ryzen is 599$ (or more?) Why would anyone with x99 setup get a new mobo and CPU just to get 3.6Ghz 16core IF he can buy a 18C/36T Intel Xeon 2.2Ghz that boosts to 3.8Ghz for 800USD on ebay? And if 3.8Ghz is not enough for you im sure you can get a bit more with FSB overclock, X99 boards do 125Mhz, 150Mhz and even 200Mhz rather easily.

And it looks like they are only just starting... - 8 cores in the mainstream. - 16 cores in HEDT - 32 cores in servers - 4 and 8 core APU with Desktop like gpu performance in notebooks ? - up to 48 cores on 7nm by end of 2018 ??? IF they manage beat 1080ti with Vega it would be nice. Now If AMD could match/beat even Volta that would be something. 31 May really can't come soon enough because right now I am not really sure what to expect.

Well, I dont expect them to beat Ti, maybe come close to matching it, but only with the water-cooled SKU. This is still great on their part. They will attempt to take the "single card" crown with dual-vega watercooled card, but that is mostly just for bragging rights I think. I think the new APUs will be great for notebooks. They should have double the CPU power and double the GPU power of their fastest last gen APUs, and that is something.

A reason to upgrade my 5820K?? Honestly after what I seen today I no longer excited for HEDT Ryzen It wont be cheap, regular most expensive Ryzen is 599$ (or more?) Why would anyone with x99 setup get a new mobo and CPU just to get 3.6Ghz 16core IF he can buy a 18C/36T Intel Xeon 2.2Ghz that boosts to 3.8Ghz for 800USD on ebay? And if 3.8Ghz is not enough for you im sure you can get a bit more with FSB overclock, X99 boards do 125Mhz, 150Mhz and even 200Mhz rather easily.

That 3.8GHz is only single core boost. In overall 6900 or 1800x is only slightly slower and 16 core Ryzen would have probably about 60% more performance. And unlike Ryzen it would be terrible at gaming or other usage that cannot fully use its treads.

This is enterprise not consumer socket.

X370 is equivalent of Z270 on Intel. X399 on AMD is gonna be equivalent to X99/X299 on Intel. X399 with maximum of 16c/32t, Intel releasing 12c/24t this year on X299. Pretty sure the Intel's 12-core will cost at least $2000 and 16c/32t from AMD will cost $1200 or less, 12-core at $800 and 10-core at $650 Considering 6950x price, you can say X99 is enterprise but it's not actually.

Well, I dont expect them to beat Ti, maybe come close to matching it, but only with the water-cooled SKU. This is still great on their part. They will attempt to take the "single card" crown with dual-vega watercooled card, but that is mostly just for bragging rights I think. I think the new APUs will be great for notebooks. They should have double the CPU power and double the GPU power of their fastest last gen APUs, and that is something.

If full Vega is slower then 1080ti it would be a disappointment because that would mean Vega cores are slower than Polaris cores. 4096 Vega cores @1525+ should be faster.

http://i65.tinypic.com/2vttjrb.png http://i63.tinypic.com/2egd001.png Good thing you and the engineers are not the ones running things at Intel...

Good thing that q2 and q3 earning report will be better

Good thing you and the engineers are not the ones running things at Intel...

Good for who? Is that good that they rip you off with overpriced old technology because they have almost all market?

Looks nice, I'm curious to see what kind of clocks it can hit once it reaches some reviewer's labs. 😀

X370 is equivalent of Z270 on Intel. X399 on AMD is gonna be equivalent to X99/X299 on Intel. X399 with maximum of 16c/32t, Intel releasing 12c/24t this year on X299. Pretty sure the Intel's 12-core will cost at least $2000 and 16c/32t from AMD will cost $1200 or less, 12-core at $800 and 10-core at $650 Considering 6950x price, you can say X99 is enterprise but it's not actually.

That's the reason I say it's not consumer.. 12 core from AMD or intel isn't going to be affordable for 99% of people I'm sure the 10core(if there is one from AMD) will likely be $900 as well.. X99 at least has affordable options. Looks like X399 will only have CPUs more expensive than the $500 1800x

A reason to upgrade my 5820K?? Honestly after what I seen today I no longer excited for HEDT Ryzen It wont be cheap, regular most expensive Ryzen is 599$ (or more?) Why would anyone with x99 setup get a new mobo and CPU just to get 3.6Ghz 16core IF he can buy a 18C/36T Intel Xeon 2.2Ghz that boosts to 3.8Ghz for 800USD on ebay? And if 3.8Ghz is not enough for you im sure you can get a bit more with FSB overclock, X99 boards do 125Mhz, 150Mhz and even 200Mhz rather easily.

Hi there OC FSB on E5-V3 or V4 Xeon is bit limited(102-105MHz as max), only OC Xeons on X99 are E5-16xxV3 models which can be OC as normal i7 chips Turbo on all cores on Xeon is too hit and miss there, you need to hack or modified BIOS to have Turbo on all cores, I think over on Anandtech there is way how to modify BIOS Without this you will be running these chips like my last E5-2683v3 at 2.3GHz and with modified BIOS I could run at 2.744Ghz as max New HDET from AMD looks very promising and looking forward to them Hope this helps Thanks, Jura

This would be a great computing CPU. My Ryzen 7 is already a beast in grid computing - adding a 16c/32t CPU would give me 48 total threads (and to think, last year I had just 8 threads with my 4790K). It's like suddenly a dam has burst and cores are spilling in, LOL. A new golden era for enthusiasts has arrived. I expect it will be expensive though (I'm thinking $1K+ for a 16c), but it's something to work towards. Based on what I've seen with Ryzen 7, it will be worth it.

A reason to upgrade my 5820K?? Honestly after what I seen today I no longer excited for HEDT Ryzen It wont be cheap, regular most expensive Ryzen is 599$ (or more?) Why would anyone with x99 setup get a new mobo and CPU just to get 3.6Ghz 16core IF he can buy a 18C/36T Intel Xeon 2.2Ghz that boosts to 3.8Ghz for 800USD on ebay? And if 3.8Ghz is not enough for you im sure you can get a bit more with FSB overclock, X99 boards do 125Mhz, 150Mhz and even 200Mhz rather easily.

You realize that intel xeon 2.2Ghz that boosts to 3.8Ghz is for one core only right? So basically, what you're asking is why would anyone get a faster Ryzen CPU with 16 cores which is more then they would ever need if they can get a much slower Intel CPU with even more cores that won't affect them at all in the hopes that one of the cores will be faster then AMDs, only some of the time. And honestly, i don't understand your first sentence. How is this information here in any way a disappointment? How are you "not excited" when it's more then was expecting? And considering Intel has nothing on this, i don't understand what you are comparing it to? As well, trying to compare Xeon processors, where you have to buy motherboards that are generally hard to get and don't come with the features of HEDT systems or even regular consumer systems, is nonsense. Lastly, you're comparing USED prices of xeon processors to unannounced NEW prices? What nonsense is this again? And an old xeon processor? Have you seen the performance of this processor? It's not good, i just don't understand your entire thought processor. :bang:

I'm sure the 10core(if there is one from AMD) will likely be $900 as well..

Extremely unlikely. Only time will tell ofcourse, but i doubt the 16-core processor will be over $999. Unlike Intel, AMD generally prices their processors based off of logic, not off of "well here's an 8 core for $999, @$125 per core, but here's a 10 core for $1750, @$175 per core, because, you know, that's logical" If AMD were to make a 10 core it'd likely be around $600-700, very unlikely to be above 700.

10 core AMD on HEDT would likely start at $749 actually would not be surprised if the 12 core is $999.

It's interesting how the CCX approach allows them to scale so high without literally throwing away a single CCX.

Then Dual-Socket board... And crazy cool workstations at Ryzenable prices.

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/23780331.jpg Never gets old! 😀

Ryzen CPUs perform quite badly in games in comparison to their Intel counterparts. ARSTehcnica's review of Ryzen R5 CPUs demonstrates a clear issue with Ryzen CPUs in gaming. What's interesting though is that the charts include results for the 7700K and R5 1500X both at 3.5GHz. In general tests the 3.5GHz 1500X is roughly as fast as the 7700K at 3.5GHz, beating it in a some tests. In games on the other hand the 3.5GHz 1500X does very poorly compared to the 3.5GHz 7700K. Here's the link: So what's the cause of this? Well... I've done some research and I think I've found the root cause of this issue. It's the huge CCX-to-CCX latency in all current Ryzen CPUs. Modern game processes spawn several simultaneous generally-interdependent threads that share data and migrate across CPU cores all the time. Having massive delays when one thread is crossing to the next CCX or trying to access data that resides in the shared cache of other other CCX is extremely inefficient in this type of workloads. Here's another video that highlights the issue with cross-CCX latency and it's relation to CPU draw call performance.