leoneazzurro
Golden Member
PRO is the name for Enterprise product
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
AMD Ryzen (Summit Ridge) Benchmarks Thread (use new thread)
Page 181 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
- Status
DeeJayBump
Member
I find it at least partially entertaining that long dormant or "quiet" accounts are suddenly coming out of sleep mode to join the deflate/defuse the imminent release of RyZen brigade. Ryzen must be quite a significant product stack for the hate, vitriol and blind, laughable foolish-ness to reach this level.
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
Visit PC Gaming and any topic on Star Citizen. Anonymous comments bring out the trolls in all of us.
I'm still hoping AMD doesn't let their motherboard partners screw everything up.
The hypers and deflaters came even when AMDs newly launched product stacks were a competitive failure, since Phenom. Mostly crazy hypes compared to the converse.
Bjt: At least get it right, without extreme exaggerations. Never did I remotely claim BDe IPC, crazy frequency at super low power at peanut cost.
But I know someone who did...
Sent from HTC 10
(Opinions are own)
DeeJayBump
Member
I've been around the pc/tech forums long enough to recognize an intentional group effort that is wholly separate from fan-boyism or scattered trolling.
Doom2pro
Senior member
I don't see how this Ryzen launch can flop, I mean look at what we know so far...
1. The AM4 Platform has already launched via OEM, that helps hammer out some of the platform related bugs before Ryzen and board partners launch, that should mean no weird platform related issues at launch.
2. Polaris has pipe cleaned 14LPP in some manner before Ryzen & Vega's launch, so I don't see any weird node issues hampering AMD here.
3. The recent Global Foundries Wafer Supply Agreement and Samsung foundry deal should assure good availability so I don't see any production issues there either.
4. The AM4 platform is further solidified by the strong showing from motherboard manufacturers as seen from CES and the recent presentation days ago and with good variety of high end and small form factor offerings.
5. AM4 Motherboards should be significantly less complex than competing Intel server derived HEDT designs which leaves significantly room in a system builder's budget for more spending on other areas like CPU or GPU.
6. If the rumors are true about the lower prices, 6c/12t SKU and Windows 7 support, then Ryzen should have quite a large adoption base with arms & wallets wide open.
7. The official and leaked benchmarks give AMD at the very least a win here, AMD is back and I don't see any chance of another Bulldozer disaster again, the sky is the limit.
It's only a matter of time now, but I'm already sold & have money set aside for a premium AM4/Ryzen VR build... The only thing I need to know now is prices and availability.
1. The AM4 Platform has already launched via OEM, that helps hammer out some of the platform related bugs before Ryzen and board partners launch, that should mean no weird platform related issues at launch.
2. Polaris has pipe cleaned 14LPP in some manner before Ryzen & Vega's launch, so I don't see any weird node issues hampering AMD here.
3. The recent Global Foundries Wafer Supply Agreement and Samsung foundry deal should assure good availability so I don't see any production issues there either.
4. The AM4 platform is further solidified by the strong showing from motherboard manufacturers as seen from CES and the recent presentation days ago and with good variety of high end and small form factor offerings.
5. AM4 Motherboards should be significantly less complex than competing Intel server derived HEDT designs which leaves significantly room in a system builder's budget for more spending on other areas like CPU or GPU.
6. If the rumors are true about the lower prices, 6c/12t SKU and Windows 7 support, then Ryzen should have quite a large adoption base with arms & wallets wide open.
7. The official and leaked benchmarks give AMD at the very least a win here, AMD is back and I don't see any chance of another Bulldozer disaster again, the sky is the limit.
It's only a matter of time now, but I'm already sold & have money set aside for a premium AM4/Ryzen VR build... The only thing I need to know now is prices and availability.
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
^^I can
If its a paper launch with zero availability for month's
Or
AMDs partners make failure prone boards
Or
The performance is over hyped
If its a paper launch with zero availability for month's
Or
AMDs partners make failure prone boards
Or
The performance is over hyped
4.5GHz as base frequency are nearly impossible at 95W, at least with this Zen generation and the 14nm. (Maybe Zen+++++++ on 7nm), so for this i made an hyperbole (i don't know if this is the correct english term), because it's impossible and i didn't saw anyone saying that. Maybe single core turbo, but over 4GHz base i don't think is currently possible.
This new "leaked" naming scheme would just kill of the Ryzen brand the moment it emerges.. too many SKU too unclear names.
No one knows what each SKU stands for.
AMDs current leadership isn't stupid, so I call that a fake.
It needs to be simple like:
Ryzen SR7 3600/4000 or SR7 3400/3600
No one knows what each SKU stands for.
AMDs current leadership isn't stupid, so I call that a fake.
It needs to be simple like:
Ryzen SR7 3600/4000 or SR7 3400/3600
I'm not a fan of the naming scheme if this ends up to being true.
I wish they would bring back the X_ to signify the number of cores, like the Phenoms. Ryzen X8 4000 for example. The 4000 signifies the boost clock speeds (4GHz) or something like that. Adored TV did a YT video and I really liked the way he speculated the naming scheme.
Only problem with that is it makes refreshes harder to brand. You'd either have to change the name, which they may not want to do if Ryzen is successful (and non-technical types won't understand Ryzen vs. something else) or the next part, maybe SR9 implies better than SR7, but again kind of nebulous, and while the last part is nice because it confers information about the CPU, but it means you constantly need to increase the clock speed or consumers won't think it's an improvement and doesn't convey IPC improvements in future versions.
Glo.
Diamond Member
https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/827663341946621952
So? Base 8 core, with 3.4/3.7 GHz around 399$?
Or top end 8 core CPU around 599$?
😉
BitsAndChips Twitter said:
So? Base 8 core, with 3.4/3.7 GHz around 399$?
Or top end 8 core CPU around 599$?
😉
RussianSensation
Elite Member
All the anti-AMD trolls and blind fanatics/Intel+NV loyalists who wished nothing more than for AMD's CPU and GPU divisions to fail for a decade are coming to terms with reality that AMD will have a monster price/performance multi-threaded line-up.
AMD should have more threads than nearly every Intel CPU from $100-$600 range, and undercut the $1100 6900K by at least $300-400. These vitriol posters are also bitter that AMD stock is up from sub-$2 and they haven't bought a share. Maybe they shorted the stock and lost $. 🙂
Any sane and objective PC gamer/consumer would want nothing more than for AMD to absolutely level every single Intel CPU so we get price wars, and for Intel to innovate. Only the blind, non-objective PC users, employees or shareholders of the competitor would oppose the most fierce competition in the CPU markets since AXP+ and A64/X2 days. Those are the glory days of CPU competition. Instead, we got 35-40% gains in performance moving from a 2600K to a 7700K, and that advantage gets reduced to 25-30% or so once we compare 5Ghz 2600K against a 5Ghz 7700K. Pathetic given that 2600K turned 6 years old this January. For years we've been stuck between a rock and hard place: either paying X58/X79/X99 chipset/mobo premiums for an enthusiast GPU-less SKUs, at the expense of buying 1 generation outdated CPU architecture (excluding X58), OR had to pay Intel a premium for die size/transistors allocated towards the worthless iGPU included inside the mainstream i3-i7 product lines. Paying a premium for a workstation product lines or subsidizing users who benefits from an iGPU inside mainstream i3/5/7 lines wasn't a real consumer choice. It was simply a choice between paying more for Intel CPU or Intel chipset and CPU. Why should I help to subsidize the cost of the GPU I'll hardly use? Why couldn't I purchase a $250 6700K with 40-50% smaller die size without the integrated graphics? No sir, can't do.
Even now we will see Intel's true colours once AMD shows proper solder/premium paste between the die and the heatspreader, while Intel continues crippling mainstream K series with $1 thermal paste. Intel's excuse for years was that the die size was too small/fragile to solder the heatspreader. We'll see about that!
Modern gaming has changed dramatically in the last 10 years, where major AAA games are nearly 90% GPU bottlenecked as soon as there is enough CPU performance on the table that the videocard cannot keep up. The idea that single core performance is king is only true to a point. More and more games are blending well-threaded. We should see even more gamers upgrade to 1440p-4K monitors in the next decade. These market trends will shift the load towards the GPU dictating gaming performance. As long as the CPU will be fast enough, the extra single core performance will not have a material impact on the user experience.
Real world tests prove that a 5Ghz 7700K shows immaterial improvements in gaming at 1080p against a 4Ghz 7700K when paired with a GTX1070 -- a GPU that's superior than what 95% of all Steam users have.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZYoNw1GJWM
That means AMD doesn't even need to match Broadwell-E or Skylake/Kaby Lake in IPC. All they have to do is bring 80-90% of single core performance and offer 50-100% more cores in key segments to make Intel CPUs less well-rounded for a new PC build. A lot of users would choose a CPU that's 85-90% as good in single core tasks and 40-70% faster in multi-threaded tasks. Ryzen's overclocking should help close the gap in single threaded per core performance against Intel's locked i3-i7 CPUs.
The launch of a $180 i3-7350K is enough for everyone to see how arrogant and monipolistic Intel has become in recent years. The idea of a dual-core CPU, priced near $200 mark in 2017 is laughable. Then we have paid-for marketing reviews that pretend this CPU is almost as good as a 2600K, while ignoring to test the real world scenario of a 4.8-5Ghz 2600K paired with a GTX1070 against a 5Ghz 7350K in well-multi-threaded modern PC titles. It's easy to run short canned benchmarks, ignore frame times and make erroneous conclusions that don't mimic real world gaming scenarios.
With games like Watch Dogs 2, GTAV, Crysis 3, Assassin's Creed Syndicate, BF1, Total War Warhammer, etc. all showing that the era of dual core CPUs is over, the i5 is now the bare minimum needed for a 2017 gaming PC. Ryzen's 4C/4T, 4C/8T offerings should put significant pressure on the entire Pentium, i3 lineup in terms of market share. I can also imagine 4C/8T, 6C/6T, 6C/12T Ryzen CPUs will make it pretty hard to recommend i5s, especially the gimped locked versions.
Intel's anti-enthusiast stance on blocking BCLK overclocking on Z270 ensures every single non-K i3/i5/i7 Kaby Lake CPU is money wasted/aimed at nontech savvy builders. Ryzen's automatic overclocking with superior cooling should help to differentiate its CPUs against Intel's locked i3-7 SKUs.
Since every single Ryzen CPU will come unlocked, I would expect objective reviewers to include BOTH stock and max overvolted and overclocked Ryzen R3, R5, R7 processor benchmarks against Intel's locked and unlocked i3/i5/i7 CPUs. Of course, I already envision how Intel would throw a hissy fit, and use its marketing and bargaining power and either "force" or put pressure on reviewers to only include 1 page of overclocked Ryzen CPUs or exclude these results entirely from launch reviews. I can imagine Intel won't like it at all if a 4.3-4.5Ghz 4C/8T, 6C/12T Ryzen that normally has a 3.6-3.7Ghz Boost is pitted against stock i3-i7s.
Let's not forget that during C2D/Q, Nehalem, Lynnfield, Sandy, Ivy eras, overclocking was a huge selling points of those processors. The G0 Q6600, D0 i7 920, 5Ghz 2600K were legendary CPUs. If every Ryzen CPU comes unlocked, every Ryzen CPU MUST be overclocked in reviews since the capability is there for anyone of us to unlock that performance - something Intel forces us to pay extra for in its K series.
In an ideal world, Zen would start price wars, Intel shifting mainstream 2-4 core i3/i5/i7 a tier down and moving 6-core Skylake 7800K to $329-339 level, while 8-core Skylake-X drops to $599-699 and 10C/20T Skylake-X drops to $999-1099. Consumers should want for Zen to be as fast as possible since that will put even more pressure on Intel to innovate with its 2019~2020 post-Tigerlake all-new CPU architecture. As consumers, we'd win!
AMD should probably charge decent early adopter premiums on Zen in case Intel responds with price drops. It would be a lot smarter to drop prices on a $500-700 8C/16T later on than to price it at $350-$400 (I see a lot of you want a $30-400 8C/16T Ryzen) and have the budget brand image hanging over their 2017 CPU.
In any case, the loyal Intel supporters will find 1-2 metrics where Intel is winning and focus in on them, ignoring all other factors. I have a feeling cheaper AM4 mobos, every Ryzen CPU's unlocked overclocking, multi-threaded performance will all be ignored with a sole focus on worthless single threaded synthetic benchmarks like GeekBench 4, and worthless synthetic multi-threaded benchmarks like Cinebench R15 that always favored Intel even during AXP+ and A64/X2 days when AMD was outperforming Intel in price/performance and real world performance in actual applications.
There are also users here who would claim Ryzen is a failure if just matches Intel while ignoring just how far ahead Intel was since Phenom II/Bulldozer days. There are still millions of other users who aren't sitting on a 3570K/3770K->6800K and everything in-between who would love more choices, price wars, and more cores at the price levels where Intel sells i3/5/7 SKUs.
Also, I don't get why existing Haswell/Skylake/Kaby Lake Intel users are so negative, pessimistic and hostile towards Ryzen. If you have a 4670K/4770K/4790K/5820K/5930K/6800K/6600K/6700K/7700K, etc. it will still work after March 2nd. It's not as if these excellent CPUs will suddenly become slow or worthless. I am pretty sure even AMD doesn't expect users with modern high-end CPUs to upgrade.
A lot of you are also ignoring the stagnation of CPUs in the laptop space. How many sub-$800 laptops have i3 and glorified i3's aka i5/7-U series? We still cannot buy a laptop with Intel's 6-8 core CPUs, and Intel has hardly released anything much faster than my 4-year-old 3635QM 3.4Ghz Ivy Bridge. I've had no worthwhile upgrade path for my Intel laptop in 4 years. Apple has been stuck for what seems like 3-4 generations on similar level or CPU performance in their MBPro before Skylake came out.
Last edited:
I would think the latter.
There is something everyone forgets and is that amd after selling you 1 ryzen sku, needs to give you enough incentive in 12+ months later to make you buy their ryzen+ sku, hopefully still on am4.
This means that selling your first in a decade competitive cpu at a bargain kills any possibility for future profits because you cant start charging more cash for sucesive uarchs in same segmentation scheme a la nvidia on gpus. It actually tends to go the opposite way.
Why kill your actual and future profits that way? Obviously lowest 8c at 400 bucks is a GODSEND for me and everyone that uses paralellizable workloads. My 0.02
Sent from my XT1040 using Tapatalk
There is something everyone forgets and is that amd after selling you 1 ryzen sku, needs to give you enough incentive in 12+ months later to make you buy their ryzen+ sku, hopefully still on am4.
This means that selling your first in a decade competitive cpu at a bargain kills any possibility for future profits because you cant start charging more cash for sucesive uarchs in same segmentation scheme a la nvidia on gpus. It actually tends to go the opposite way.
Why kill your actual and future profits that way? Obviously lowest 8c at 400 bucks is a GODSEND for me and everyone that uses paralellizable workloads. My 0.02
Sent from my XT1040 using Tapatalk
Vattila
Senior member
Hi all, I've activated my long dormant account — exciting times!
For clarity, I've re-tabulated the Ryzen line-up from the supposed leak, splitting the range into consumer and business. The claimed range looks sound for the full line-up that AMD said they will provide. The model numbers are logical, with the first digit probably denoting the Zen generation, and the rest of the number matching up against Intel's Core model numbers on a performance basis (e.g. R7 1700X against i7-7700K).
Speculation: The X suffix may mean that XFR (eXtended Frequency Range) is enabled only in these models, or that these models are specially binned for high frequency. If so, these models will be the gamers choice, with frequency needed to match the single-thread performance of Intel's counterparts in games. The non-X models will match up well in thread count and parallell compute performance against their counterparts — good for content creators and the like.
Since the whole range is presumably based on the 8 core Summit Ridge die, I conclude they will be stockpiling salvaged chips for a while to build up required volume for the R5 and R3 models. That makes sense of the claim, according to the rumour, that only the R7 models will be available at launch.
Regarding pricing, I guess they will start just below the Intel counterparts, and then adjust down as necessary to compete and sell inventory. The most interesting part is the top model, R7 1800X, which price may possibly end up squarely between i7-7700K and 6900K.
For clarity, I've re-tabulated the Ryzen line-up from the supposed leak, splitting the range into consumer and business. The claimed range looks sound for the full line-up that AMD said they will provide. The model numbers are logical, with the first digit probably denoting the Zen generation, and the rest of the number matching up against Intel's Core model numbers on a performance basis (e.g. R7 1700X against i7-7700K).
Speculation: The X suffix may mean that XFR (eXtended Frequency Range) is enabled only in these models, or that these models are specially binned for high frequency. If so, these models will be the gamers choice, with frequency needed to match the single-thread performance of Intel's counterparts in games. The non-X models will match up well in thread count and parallell compute performance against their counterparts — good for content creators and the like.
Since the whole range is presumably based on the 8 core Summit Ridge die, I conclude they will be stockpiling salvaged chips for a while to build up required volume for the R5 and R3 models. That makes sense of the claim, according to the rumour, that only the R7 models will be available at launch.
Regarding pricing, I guess they will start just below the Intel counterparts, and then adjust down as necessary to compete and sell inventory. The most interesting part is the top model, R7 1800X, which price may possibly end up squarely between i7-7700K and 6900K.
Arachnotronic
Lifer
These are not consistent positions.
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
Yup its happened to me with a amd FX6300
First Gigabyte board dead memory socket
Second Gigabyte board video failed around 30 day mark
Third and different model Gigabyte board video failure again after around 6 months
Fourth board is an Asus, works fine but I didn't read the fine print and it has vga out only. No HDMI, no DVI. I assumed 1080p output which was plastered all over the front of the box would have something besides vga only but nope. I'll admit this board hasn't failed but I certainly feel snookered by it.
AMD frequently claims plenty of availability then there turns out to be next to nothing because problem's...
This is subjective its only my opinion.
Last edited:
DrMrLordX
Lifer
I sort of expected that, though I was guessing that they would use an 8c/8t chip in this position. Though if the price is as low as $230 for the 6c/12t chip then I will be a little surprised. Surely they would charge a little more for such a chip when fighting the i5-7600k? Otherwise, the strategy is simple: overwhelm the Intel Kabylake offering with core count/thread count. Hitting those price points (or something similar) would amount to a significant increase in profit margin vs. what AMD gets from their FM2+ and AM3+ chips, and the volume . . .
False, clearly the performance of Ryzen is over 9000.
lulz
AMD needs to prove themselves, and establish the AM4 platform, period. Right now it's as much about selling boards as it is about CPUs. They can sell people upgrades later. Expect the pricing structure to be similar (which would be suitable for margins) with the exception of the top-end chip which will hit the $800-$1000 range by the time Zen+ rolls out.
Asus? No, though the customer service . . .
Gigabyte? No, though the UEFI will probably suck.
MSI? Hmm. Maybe.
Kaby lake and 5820k destroys the best ryzen if the aots bench is real. Not within 10%
I don't think AMD is going to try to massively undercut Intel on price, at least not outside of the high-end where Intel has been gouging because AMD has had absolute nothing capable of competing for years. If their salvage part is a 4C/8T chip and it can still hit good clocks, they might not have anything below $200. I think that they want to leave some market space for their APUs and that's harder to do if Ryzen comes in too low.
Doom2pro
Senior member
The AOTS benchmark is from the same profile as a previous Vega fake benchmark, furthermore AOTS is known to be friendly to AMD hardware and the CPU ID ends with a character that indicates an iGPU which we all know Summit Ridge/Zeppelin DOES NOT HAVE.
Give it up already, it's a fake, no doubt about it... You doubters are all about to be made fools of, now is your chance to save face.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
