• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

Page 48 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
716
1,637
136
I suspect it probably has something to with the fact that they are not telling the truth about TDP. It is not 65 watt and 95 watt. If you notice, the new Wraith coolers are designed for 95w TDP and 140w TDP.

So, AMD sent a high quality cooler and a high rpm industrial fan to make sure the chips are cooled adequately to see XFR kick in. I'm not sure how much headroom there is really going to be beyond that frequency wise. Otherwise they would have sent their new Wraith coolers to show off as well.

We will see Tuesday, but that did raise a red flag and grab my attention.
Actually, it's all about having freedom for reviewers. Anyone buying an existing 1700X or 1800X will be providing their own cooler. Giving reviewers a special edition standard, decent, heatsink with only an upgraded fan helps to ensure reviewers are taking into account the reality of users who buy such a CPU.

I mean, seriously, who is going to run a $30 heatsink on a $500 CPU?

Well, I'll be trying with the old Phenom II X6 stock heatsink, but then I'll be using water :p
 

Teizo

Golden Member
Oct 28, 2010
1,271
31
91
they most likely have to count in XFR and have some headroom....giving 95tdp cooler on same watt cpu might throttle it.
The 95w TDP Wraith cooler is for the 1700. The 140w TDP Wraith cooler is for the 1700X and 1800X.

Like I say...this just caught my eye and is something to look for on Tuesday.
 

bjt2

Senior member
Sep 11, 2016
784
180
71
I suspect it probably has something to with the fact that they are not telling the truth about TDP. It is not 65 watt and 95 watt. If you notice, the new Wraith coolers are designed for 95w TDP and 140w TDP.

So, AMD sent a high quality cooler and a high rpm industrial fan to make sure the chips are cooled adequately to see XFR kick in. I'm not sure how much headroom there is really going to be beyond that frequency wise. Otherwise they would have sent their new Wraith coolers to show off as well.

We will see Tuesday, but that did raise a red flag and grab my attention.
The more TDP a cooler support, the cooler a given CPU would be. In the case of Ryzen, the cooler the CPU, the higher XFR will clock it... So...
 

Teizo

Golden Member
Oct 28, 2010
1,271
31
91
Actually, it's all about having freedom for reviewers. Anyone buying an existing 1700X or 1800X will be providing their own cooler. Giving reviewers a special edition standard, decent, heatsink with only an upgraded fan helps to ensure reviewers are taking into account the reality of users who buy such a CPU.

I mean, seriously, who is going to run a $30 heatsink on a $500 CPU?

Well, I'll be trying with the old Phenom II X6 stock heatsink, but then I'll be using water :p
You mean the one AMD designed to be used with the 1700X and 1800X with 140 watt TDP dissipation? Yeah, I have no idea why they would send that to reviewers.......
 

Teizo

Golden Member
Oct 28, 2010
1,271
31
91
The more TDP a cooler support, the cooler a given CPU would be. In the case of Ryzen, the cooler the CPU, the higher XFR will clock it... So...
Which is what I am saying. I'll say it again....The Wraith cooler AMD made for the 1700X and 1800X are designed for 140 watt TDP heat dissipation. I thought they would have enough confidence in them to send reviewers those to test with.
 

Teizo

Golden Member
Oct 28, 2010
1,271
31
91
Look at the rated cooling TDP......................That is all I am saying, and that is what I want to find out on Tuesday.

 

WhoBeDaPlaya

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2000
7,416
393
126
Oh okay, so the IMC is in-house. Sort of makes sense.

Smart too, AMD really had to nail it on the IMC if they were going to support an 8c/16t CPU with dual-channel configs. That sort of protects them from silly OEMs that will bundle Ryzen with DDR4-2133 and the like.
Huh - I thought that AMD had used a/some Synopsys hard IPs for the memory controller?
 

KTE

Senior member
May 26, 2016
478
130
76
For large-scale buyers, sales channels are different now than back in 2005 and earlier. The really big ones (Amazon, Google, MS, etc) are buying through ODMs, and in some cases they may be buying directly. Intel has already started customizing chips for their larger clients. Those customizations may even be baked into Xeons sold to smaller parties without anyone being the wiser.
Yea, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon and all DCs etc order directly, and as a 'Partner' they will attain huge discounts.

I wish I could reveal some of the prices before and after, they are so shocking, but I'd be sued into a singularity.

I can't wait to see Naples and how disruptive it may potentially be. The killer growth markets now are Cloud, HPC, Big Data Analytics, AI and these have an endless performance need. Even the Power9 should be out by then.

On Ryzen... It is looking a lot more impressive than I expected, and certainly far past the Agena and Bulldozer tags now. I don't have a sample yet but I'm looking to have one on launch day.

It certainly has a niche but execution is now key for AMD.

Launch clocks are better than I expected, but headroom and power just as predicted. I'm optimistic the process will yet improve quite a bit, but how much so is critical to continuing success.

Sent from HTC 10
(Opinions are own)
 

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
716
1,637
136
Which is what I am saying. I'll say it again....The Wraith cooler AMD made for the 1700X and 1800X are designed for 140 watt TDP heat dissipation. I thought they would have enough confidence in them to send reviewers those to test with.
You need to have production of those coolers up and running full steam. AFAICT, AMD only has a very limited supply of the 140W Wraith coolers.

At this point in time, all 1700X and 1800X CPUs come without a stock heatsink.
 

HBRents

Junior Member
Feb 22, 2017
15
50
41
And no, NDAs are boilerplate, they certainly don't keep 130 NDA forms updated for every place they do business.
Just saying if you're an out of country entity, that validates the argument even further if you're claiming AMD is choosing to base all of its NDA's in American courts. It amounts to nothing less than a gentleman's agreement if they can't enforce an out of country tech site. They could simply own another publication under a different name and leak the details to their sister site and never face repercussion so its possible this Turkish website does in indeed possess a sample under NDA.
 

french toast

Senior member
Feb 22, 2017
969
774
106
1800X and 1700X come without cooler, so there's no "stock" cooler to be tested, as it doesn't exist
I may be getting confused with all the fud and leaks but....
I thought there was three stock coolers, a small 65w one, a 95w and 140w ? That the 1700 can with one, but 1700x and 1800x came with higher wraith coolers, if you wanted no fan you ordred the "WOF" model.

Like i said i could be getting confused there.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,719
2,002
126
That is the ~15-20% I mentioned in my post. That should be aggregate perf. improvement over 6900K. Still that doesn't make SKL-X much better value proposition than 6900K because perf./$ ratio will still be vastly better on AMD side. AMD made a "quantum" IPC leap with Zen and it seems they are going to do yearly IPC bumps on this core which spells bad news for intel. Their next core that will give us some measurable IPC jump is ~2 years away, just like 2 next iterations of Zen are.
I don't think you can make this statement without seeing how Intel prices the successor to the 6900K.

Personally, if I were Intel, I'd introduce a 12 core SKU at the $1700 price point, shift everything down, and then further introduce an 8 core with 28 PCIe lanes to do battle with the top Ryzen. Then the 10/12 core parts can be sold at a hefty premium.
 

Minkoff

Member
Nov 7, 2013
54
8
41
Which is what I am saying. I'll say it again....The Wraith cooler AMD made for the 1700X and 1800X are designed for 140 watt TDP heat dissipation. I thought they would have enough confidence in them to send reviewers those to test with.
There is not much time to write the reviews, and most reviewers don't use stock coolers anyway, as almost everyone of them will do a bit of overclocking.

The only way for AMD to have somewhat control over the numbers and reach consistency throughout tests is to supply them with an aftermarket mid-range one.

As such, if you want to use a better heatsink - you're welcome, but you won't use a lower grade one than the provided NH U12S.
 

HBRents

Junior Member
Feb 22, 2017
15
50
41
Personally, if I were Intel, I'd introduce a 12 core SKU at the $1700 price point, shift everything down, and then further introduce an 8 core with 28 PCIe lanes to do battle with the top Ryzen. Then the 10/12 core parts can be sold at a hefty premium.
Well thank god you aren't Intel because that is still an awful deal. 50% more CPU cores for an over 200% increase of the very most expensive Ryzen 1800X!

If Intel wants to try to provide value to the consumers again they need to have their top end 8 core at no more than $500, 10 core at $625 (25% more cores for 25% more money), and a 12 core at $700-800.
 

Teizo

Golden Member
Oct 28, 2010
1,271
31
91
There is not much time to write the reviews, and most reviewers don't use stock coolers anyway, as almost everyone of them will do a bit of overclocking.

The only way for AMD to have somewhat control over the numbers and reach consistency throughout tests is to supply them with an aftermarket mid-range one.

As such, if you want to use a better heatsink - you're welcome, but you won't use a lower grade one than the provided NH U12S.
They are sending the Noctual coolers in their review kits with instructions to the reviewers to use that cooler. They could have just as much consistency with sending out the 140w TDP Wraith cooler. Don't you think at 140 watt TDP cooler would be enough for XFR and overclocking if their chips were really 95 watts?
 

Teizo

Golden Member
Oct 28, 2010
1,271
31
91
You need to have production of those coolers up and running full steam. AFAICT, AMD only has a very limited supply of the 140W Wraith coolers.

At this point in time, all 1700X and 1800X CPUs come without a stock heatsink.
Ok, that is the answer I am looking for. I still suspect these chips' TDP is being hedged a bit. It seems AMD would have enough 140 watt Wraith coolers to send out to reviewers though. Not enough for mass sale just yet, but at least enough to review their chips. I imagine that Noctua heatsink and industrial fan is probably rated around 200 watt TDP.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,719
2,002
126
Well thank god you aren't Intel because that is still an awful deal. 50% more CPU cores for an over 200% increase of the very most expensive Ryzen 1800X!
12 core SKX-X would have no competition, so it's a "good" value if you really need the cores (i.e. time is money for your use case).

If Intel wants to try to provide value to the consumers again they need to have their top end 8 core at no more than $500, 10 core at $625 (25% more cores for 25% more money), and a 12 core at $700-800.
Nah. Bring in a lower-clocked 8 core/16 thread chip with 28 PCIe lanes at $499 to wreck AMD's party, then put an 8 core with 44 PCIe lanes at higher clocks at the $799 price point. Then at the $999 price point, Intel can put out a 10 core/20 thread + 44 PCIe lane part, which would be uncontested. Then, of course, for the really "hardcore" people put out the 12 core/24 thread part with 44 PCIe lanes at $1700.

This way Intel can have its cake and eat it, too. It's really actually straightforward and should be good for the consumer as 6/8 core prices should come down nicely.
 

french toast

Senior member
Feb 22, 2017
969
774
106
though overvolted to a degree at the horizon demo it did draw the same as the 6900k under load - that is a 140watt part IIRC.
yes that was the 1700x engineering sample, no turbo and rumoured to be overvolted for stability.

At the full launch they tested the 1700 65w vs 6900k 140w, in the footnotes it mentioned something like 115w drawn from the plug socket under load vs around 140w for intel.
 

Dresdenboy

Golden Member
Jul 28, 2003
1,730
554
136
citavia.blog.de
12 core SKX-X would have no competition, so it's a "good" value if you really need the cores (i.e. time is money for your use case).



Nah. Bring in a lower-clocked 8 core/16 thread chip with 28 PCIe lanes at $499 to wreck AMD's party, then put an 8 core with 44 PCIe lanes at higher clocks at the $799 price point. Then at the $999 price point, Intel can put out a 10 core/20 thread + 44 PCIe lane part, which would be uncontested. Then, of course, for the really "hardcore" people put out the 12 core/24 thread part with 44 PCIe lanes at $1700.

This way Intel can have its cake and eat it, too. It's really actually straightforward and should be good for the consumer as 6/8 core prices should come down nicely.
This sounds plausible for the HEDT market. But how would this affect mainstream markets, where still a lot of the revenue is coming from?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

ASK THE COMMUNITY