AMD Ryzen Gen 2 Set For Q2 2018

[Thunder 57]

I just think a desktop RR APU doesn't really fit in the market right now. OEMs (that AMD is now focused on pursuing in the mainstream and server market) can easily use the existing mobile RR APU for their ready made systems. And the DIY computer market will by the majority continue to prefer the existing iGPU-less Ryzen models unless the APU brings further advantages. We'll have to see what USPs Ryzen Gaming brings to the table, a desktop APU may be built upon that.

Desktop RR makes perfect sense. OEMs would be all over that. A 15W or even 35W mobile RR in a desktop is nothing to get excited about. They would need to be 65W to compete with Intel. Businesses buy those SFF desktops in truckloads, and the last thing anyone wants in one of them these days is a GPU. They would be missing out on that market.

Also, I would gladly pay a bit more for a Zen APU on the desktop. If your video card ever died, or you had to go without it for a few days, you would have a backup. More importantly, it makes it much easier to resell or hand down to friends/family, etc.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Look don't get me wrong, I would love RR products in the 65-95W TDP range on AM4. That's what I originally wanted before it became obvious that Ryzen was the only thing going on AM4 (aside from BR, bleh).

But if you look at what AMD has done with their desktop APU lineup since Kaveri jumped the shark, you'll see that APUs have taken a backseat on anything but mobile. If they are actually going to go back to primetime APUs on desktop then great.

 

[amd6502]

Look don't get me wrong, I would love RR products in the 65-95W TDP range on AM4. That's what I originally wanted before it became obvious that Ryzen was the only thing going on AM4 (aside from BR, bleh).

But if you look at what AMD has done with their desktop APU lineup since Kaveri jumped the shark, you'll see that APUs have taken a backseat on anything but mobile. If they are actually going to go back to primetime APUs on desktop then great.

All I can add is that they didn't design the graphics functions and put the hdmi and/or dvi-out on all AM4 boards just for Bristol Ridge (excavator APUs).

 

[Thunder 57]

Look don't get me wrong, I would love RR products in the 65-95W TDP range on AM4. That's what I originally wanted before it became obvious that Ryzen was the only thing going on AM4 (aside from BR, bleh).

But if you look at what AMD has done with their desktop APU lineup since Kaveri jumped the shark, you'll see that APUs have taken a backseat on anything but mobile. If they are actually going to go back to primetime APUs on desktop then great.

I think they'll get to the desktop. Mobile was obviously the priority, it's a much larger market. They were also far less competitive there. They only have so many resources. I think we'll see RR on desktop soon enough.

 

[Abwx]

Ryzen mobile are designed for DT as well, at 210mm2 and 0.5W/mm2 they could easily launch a 95W SKU with both CPU and GPU maxed out, but i suspect that they wont release anything above 65W..

That being said DT is something like 35% of the market, no surprise that mobile get the first silicon, and still, HP (along with Acer now) has two months exclusivity, so they will have to first start supplying other OEMs with Ryzen Mobile in January 2018 before the chip finaly find its way in DTs..

 

[CatMerc]

How do you expect that to happen?
At 3200MHz DDR4 Raven has 51.2GB/s of shared bandwidth.
RX 550 has 112GB/s of discrete bandwidth.

It has 3 CUs less as well, but that difference is totally meaningless.

There is no way Raven can come even close to RX 550.

550 has an absurdly overspecced memory system. The 560 has the exact same bandwidth with double the CU's.

Add to that the fact that Raven is Vega based, having that more significant L2 cache and ROPs being clients of it, and it can certainly happen.

The fact that Bristol Ridge in dekstop gaming is still a fair chunk faster than Raven Ridge even at similar memory speeds (with an inferior controller too), tells me drivers and power limits are holding back Raven hard.

 

[The Stilt]

550 has an absurdly overspecced memory system. The 560 has the exact same bandwidth with double the CU's.

Add to that the fact that Raven is Vega based, having that more significant L2 cache and ROPs being clients of it, and it can certainly happen.

The fact that Bristol Ridge in dekstop gaming is still a fair chunk faster than Raven Ridge even at similar memory speeds (with an inferior controller too), tells me drivers and power limits are holding back Raven hard.

That might be the case, but meanwhile the full RX 560 has already a pretty bad memory bottle neck.

I just cannot see Raven getting close to RX 550 performance levels at less than 45% of the bandwidth and with half the ROPs.

 

[Topweasel]

Desktop APU may be dead since the OEMs these days love using mobile parts in all-in-one desktop units.

No its just probably listed under Ryzen 2nd Gen. There is not reason not to release it even if they think it would be a poor seller. The OEMs want it and its the whole reason we dont get 32 PCIe lanes.

 

[PingSpike]

Not everyone is buying AIOs, I wouldn't.

I have no idea why these kinds of systems are so popular. They have everything that sucks about a laptop (low power, low performance parts, terrible expansion options, overheating issues) and in exchange all you get is marginally more portability, but not enough to really call it "portable". They're abominations.

 

[maddie]

That might be the case, but meanwhile the full RX 560 has already a pretty bad memory bottle neck.

I just cannot see Raven getting close to RX 550 performance levels at less than 45% of the bandwidth and with half the ROPs.

RX 560 has the same memory bandwidth/CU as the RX 570 and RX 580. Are you saying that almost the entire Polaris line is memory starved?

 

[neblogai]

RX 560 has the same memory bandwidth/CU as the RX 570 and RX 580. Are you saying that almost the entire Polaris line is memory starved?

Also- GT1030 is on a 64bit bus- and that gives it enough bandwidth to still be able to compete vs RX550.
GT1030 is 384 cuda cores- half of GTX1050Ti, and half the bandwidth.
RX550 512SPs is half of RX560 (1024SP)- but the same bandwidth. That 128bit bus may help it a bit- but still leaves it in the half-RX560 speed territory.

 

[The Stilt]

RX 560 has the same memory bandwidth/CU as the RX 570 and RX 580. Are you saying that almost the entire Polaris line is memory starved?

Severely ROP and memory starved.
The Vega iGPU inside Raven also has the lowest ROP to CU ratio of all AMD GPUs so far (0.727).
Ever since Hawaii (1.454 ROP:CU ratio) the GCN GPUs have been held back by the insufficient render backend resources (apparently current GCN cannot support more than 4 RBs per SE). This is the case with all Polaris GPUs and especially with Vega. The performance difference between Vega 64 & 56 at the same frequency is diminising due to the backend starvation (1:1 ROP:CU in 64, 1.142 in 56).

 

[AtenRa]

That might be the case, but meanwhile the full RX 560 has already a pretty bad memory bottle neck.

I just cannot see Raven getting close to RX 550 performance levels at less than 45% of the bandwidth and with half the ROPs.

Do you have a link for raven iGPU specs (ROPs, TMUs etc)

 

[CatMerc]

That might be the case, but meanwhile the full RX 560 has already a pretty bad memory bottle neck.

I just cannot see Raven getting close to RX 550 performance levels at less than 45% of the bandwidth and with half the ROPs.

Ah, forgot about the ROPs. Was pretty hung up about the CU's.

In any case, it should perform much better than what we're seeing now in actual games. In synthetics I think it's close to correct.

 

[The Stilt]

Ah, forgot about the ROPs. Was pretty hung up about the CU's.

In any case, it should perform much better than what we're seeing now in actual games. In synthetics I think it's close to correct.

Sure.
Raven is no doubt very power efficient, but expecting full performance at 15/25W is just silly.
For example the FX-8800P Carrizo's which had the same nominal TDP required ~70W to max out the CPU and the GPU simultaneously.
Maxing out meaning that both the CPU and the GPU were able to sustain their maximum advertized clocks (3.4GHz CPU and 800MHz GPU).

 

[FlanK3r]

Few months there are ES of Pinnacle Ridge, so why are some people so surprise? It is refresh, not new core

 

[eek2121]

Everyone is clamoring for desktop RR, me? I can't wait for a Threadripper refresh. I was able to run CPU-Z benches at 4.375Ghz on my 1950X and the results were mind blowing (519 single core score). The voltage? Not so much.

 

[whm1974]

Well for me it will a few years before I'll have the money to build another system, and hopefully the prices of memory and GPUs will back to normal by then.

Anyway I do hope that AMD will continue to improve with both Ryzen and their CPUs.

 

[moinmoin]

They very much do fit into current market and offer high-performance APU for AM4 platform.

An APU for AM4 platform that compares with a Ryzen 5 1500X at best CPU wise. Sure, OEMs will use it (even if it's only available as mobile part) but for DIY market they'll have to offer the performance range of the existing desktop Ryzen chip to make any impact. Or does anybody expect the majority of people to take an 1400/1500X grade APU over an 1600/1700 for desktop because it includes an iGPU?

 

[whm1974]

An APU for AM4 platform that compares with a Ryzen 5 1500X at best CPU wise. Sure, OEMs will use it (even if it's only available as mobile part) but for DIY market they'll have to offer the performance range of the existing desktop Ryzen chip to make any impact. Or does anybody expect the majority of people to take an 1400/1500X grade APU over an 1600/1700 for desktop because it includes an iGPU?

Considering that many of those people are not into tech, the answer is yes.

 

[moinmoin]

Considering that many of those people are not into tech, the answer is yes.

That's the audience for AIOs, not for DIYs.

 

[whm1974]

That's the audience for AIOs, not for DIYs.

Aside from a few use cases, I really think that AIOs are a bad idea.

 

[Topweasel]

An APU for AM4 platform that compares with a Ryzen 5 1500X at best CPU wise. Sure, OEMs will use it (even if it's only available as mobile part) but for DIY market they'll have to offer the performance range of the existing desktop Ryzen chip to make any impact. Or does anybody expect the majority of people to take an 1400/1500X grade APU over an 1600/1700 for desktop because it includes an iGPU?

Sure I need the 8 cores in my my main desktop. But if I am for example building a slim streamer for the livingroom. I am more likely to get an an AMD APU over an Intel an Intel R3 at the ~$100 point. Gives me some flexibility to play games, means I don't need an additional graphics card, since outright performance isn't the most important in the system I am not going to care about outright system performance.

There is a market for Desktop APU's. It isn't always going to be an outright 1:1 performance comparison. But it is there.

The OEM's don't want desktop don't want mobile APU's. That is why AM4 supports APU's. OEM's want APU's that work on desktop sockets so they can offer a full selection of performance and price tiers per product or part.

 

[whm1974]

Sure I need the 8 cores in my my main desktop. But if I am for example building a slim streamer for the livingroom. I am more likely to get an an AMD APU over an Intel an Intel R3 at the ~$100 point. Gives me some flexibility to play games, means I don't need an additional graphics card, since outright performance isn't the most important in the system I am not going to care about outright system performance.

There is a market for Desktop APU's. It isn't always going to be an outright 1:1 performance comparison. But it is there.

The OEM's don't want desktop don't want mobile APU's. That is why AM4 supports APU's. OEM's want APU's that work on desktop sockets so they can offer a full selection of performance and price tiers per product or part.

Aside from a HTPC and the really small form factors like the NUC, most of us probably rather have a proper CPU and dGPU.

 

[slashy16]

I have no idea why these kinds of systems are so popular. They have everything that sucks about a laptop (low power, low performance parts, terrible expansion options, overheating issues) and in exchange all you get is marginally more portability, but not enough to really call it "portable". They're abominations.

AIO's are great for people who want a PC that looks decent. I bought my parents an AIO ten years ago and other than adding an SSD it still runs fine. Sorry to say but, PC's are just disposable appliances now. Appearance and form factor is far more important than specifications or performance. Apple realized this years ago and it is one of the reasons they will soon be the first Trillion Dollar company. I can't bring myself to suggest a custom built or ATX standard OEM PC to anyone outside of gamers these days. The PC industry is dead and nothing will bring it back. I'm still shocked at how fast iPhones and iPads replaced laptops and desktops in the engineering firm I work for. I never thought I would see people giving up their brand new laptop for a tablet but, then Apple released the iPad Pro and Microsoft finally perfected office on IOS and here we are. We are testing CAD and other core applications right now direct from the cloud and even are most powerful PC users will be switched to Ipads or NUC's soon enough. PC's are like the old guy bringing a muscle car to the tesla meet lol.