piesquared
Golden Member
- Oct 16, 2006
- 1,651
- 473
- 136
And intel would be known as the bargain bin company with the low profits and margins to go along with it. It might also clear up more room at GloFo for higher margin parts and more GPUs.
Well, you can count on AMD wanting to get at least a year out of the tapeout/masking of Raven Ridge. So I wouldn't look for the next generation APU parts being available until 2019.Any words on picasso apu? it's nowhere in the slides..
is it cancelled or will amd go with similar upgrade path as fm2 socket?
if it's cancelled then it'd make more sense for me to go straight for 2400g
Matisse and Picasso are coming in 2019.Any words on picasso apu? it's nowhere in the slides..
is it cancelled or will amd go with similar upgrade path as fm2 socket?
if it's cancelled then it'd make more sense for me to go straight for 2400g
That's such a dumb argument.AMD would be crazy not to release something bellow $99, it makes perfect sense to sell a 2c Ryzen APU,
Intel sells plenty of sub $99 Celeron/Pentium
2c/4t 3CU APU makes perfect sense for desktops and laptops.
I'm sort of on the fence here. While I agree that AMD should replace the BR APU with a cut down RR one, their FAB partners may not have enough room left to make them as they are full with making Ryzen, RR, and Radeon.AMD would be crazy not to release something bellow $99, it makes perfect sense to sell a 2c Ryzen APU,
Intel sells plenty of sub $99 Celeron/Pentium
2c/4t 3CU APU makes perfect sense for desktops and laptops.
Yeah this is the leaked slide from late 2017, but they dont show it again in january.. probably just as peterscott said amd wanting to mask picasso to prioritize raven ridge salesMatisse and Picasso are coming in 2019.
I don't think AMD is going to announce them this far in advance.
![]()
Exactly.Oh I agree that AMD doesn't need a sub$100 2c/4t desktop APU, and guys like @Shivansps can simply buy a G4560. I am thinking that the low end should move over to quad cores anyway.
AMD don't "need" a sub-$99.99 processor.
Get an Intel processor.
AMD don't want to sell sub-$99.99 processors for obvious reasons.
While this might cut down some on word-of-mouth advertising, from people buying cheap PCs for F&Fs, it might be a wise move. AMD is technically fabless, so, they don't necessarily need the volume that Intel does, to fill their fabs to capacity, which includes a lot of sales of low-end dies, that probably don't make huge profits (or maybe they still do, Intel's Gross Margins remain high).No. AMD doesn't need to offer anything below $99.99.
Yet, AMD did this to this date, and since the fall of Phenom this is what maintained the lights on. Remember the entry level from 754 to AM3, FM1, FM2? AMD offered very nice deals in the area petty much until G4560 arrived. And im petty sure it was the bulk of their sales for a long time. So im shoked to read what im reading here, they dont need this anymore? What? why? they did this for years no reason to stop now. Not reason to punish consumers like this either. This is a whopping 100% price increase on entry level.While this might cut down some on word-of-mouth advertising, from people buying cheap PCs for F&Fs, it might be a wise move. AMD is technically fabless, so, they don't necessarily need the volume that Intel does, to fill their fabs to capacity, which includes a lot of sales of low-end dies, that probably don't make huge profits (or maybe they still do, Intel's Gross Margins remain high).
I don't know if I would call this a high class Forum , as plenty of members own low end machines. That said, $100 for a quad core APU of RR caliber isn't that much for what we are getting. Now don't get me wrong, maybe AMD should sell a cheaper RR APU to replace BR, but do AMD's partners have enough capacity left in their 16nm Fabs to make such APUs now?I cant belive what im reading here. Amd dosent need to offer a sub $100 sku? really? No, i think people are saying that just because AMD dosent have those and they feel the need to justify every AMD move.
Seriusly WTF. Look at the HP/Lenovo/Dell, they ALL have 2 cores AMD A4/A6 desktops and AIO, some of the OEM best sellers on Amazon are Celeron and Pentiums SMALL CORES.
And here Argentina we sell like 20 A4 and A8 builds per week! Far more than Celeron and Pentiums(mostly because of price).
Then i come here and read that sub $100 is not needed... im sorry i did not realised this was a high class forum where price is not a issue.
They are moving to 12nm now, that should be freeing 16nm fabs. From what it looks like, the entire 16nm Ryzen production is now behind replaced by this 16nm RR APU and Ryzen is moved to 12nm right?I don't know if I would call this a high class Forum , as plenty of members own low end machines. That said, $100 for a quad core APU of RR caliber isn't that much for what we are getting. Now don't get me wrong, maybe AMD should sell a cheaper RR APU to replace BR, but do AMD's partners have enough capacity left in their 16nm Fabs to make such APUs now?
You just needed to look at the numbers.I cant belive what im reading here. Amd dosent need to offer a sub $100 sku? really? No, i think people are saying that just because AMD dosent have those and they feel the need to justify every AMD move.
Seriusly WTF. Look at the HP/Lenovo/Dell, they ALL have 2 cores AMD A4/A6 desktops and AIO, some of the OEM best sellers on Amazon are Celeron and Pentiums SMALL CORES.
And here Argentina we sell like 20 A4 and A8 builds per week! Far more than Celeron and Pentiums(mostly because of price).
Then i come here and read that sub $100 is not needed... im sorry i did not realised this was a high class forum where price is not a issue.
Indeed not, I don't blame AMD for not releasing a cheaper RR APU at the moment as they really can't afford to right now. Maybe latter they will or maybe not. And besides an extra $30 for a much better APU isn't that much considering what you are getting.You just needed to look at the numbers.
AMD has been relegated to selling cheap processors for years and was deep in the red.
AMD was able to turn a profit with Zen and its higher selling prices.
Clearly, selling cheap processors is not the way to go.
No, selling *only* cheap, poorly performing processors (as AMD did for years) is not the way to go.You just needed to look at the numbers.
AMD has been relegated to selling cheap processors for years and was deep in the red.
AMD was able to turn a profit with Zen and its higher selling prices.
Clearly, selling cheap processors is not the way to go.
Something tells me that a lot of budget gamers will be buying the 2200G and 2400G in droves if this mining bubble doesn't pop anytime soon. They will simply get by with the iGPU until it pops.They are moving to 12nm now, that should be freeing 16nm fabs. From what it looks like, the entire 16nm Ryzen production is now behind replaced by this 16nm RR APU and Ryzen is moved to 12nm right?
I cant belive they dont have something a bit smaller, right now they have nothing in the area of Celeron and pentiums, not to mention Intel small cores have no rival now.
Of cause they are poor performing: that's why they are so cheap.No, selling *only* cheap, poorly performing processors (as AMD did for years) is not the way to go.
no, not a valid comparison. Many big OEM's have products ranging from pentium to i5/i7 within the same product line. And they don't want to mess with different sockets within a product line. So in order to win as many OEM deals as possible it is important for AMD to gave a complete CPU program including budget.That's such a dumb argument.
It would be like saying: Nissan has a car that sells for ~$12000, so Subaru has to have one too.
AMD cannot win the race to the bottom.no, not a valid comparison. Many big OEM's have products ranging from pentium to i5/i7 within the same product line. And they don't want to mess with different sockets within a product line. So in order to win as many OEM deals as possible it is important for AMD to gave a complete CPU program including budget.
Selling something doesn't mean you are making a profit. They can still offer Bristol ridge in sub $100 space. A 2-core raven ridge would either mean disabling most of the hardware in current die or make a new one. The later is of the table because it's against the modular design of Zen that comes in 4-core blocks. There won't be a 2-core design.I cant belive what im reading here. Amd dosent need to offer a sub $100 sku? really? No, i think people are saying that just because AMD dosent have those and they feel the need to justify every AMD move.
Seriusly WTF. Look at the HP/Lenovo/Dell, they ALL have 2 cores AMD A4/A6 desktops and AIO, some of the OEM best sellers on Amazon are Celeron and Pentiums SMALL CORES.
And here Argentina we sell like 20 A4 and A8 builds per week! Far more than Celeron and Pentiums(mostly because of price).
Then i come here and read that sub $100 is not needed... im sorry i did not realised this was a high class forum where price is not a issue.