Speculation: AMD's response to Intel's 8-core i9-9900K

How will AMD respond to the release of Intel's 8-core processor?

  • Ride it out with the current line-up until 7nm in 2019

    Votes: 128 71.9%
  • Release Ryzen 7 2800X, using harvested chips based on the current version of the die

    Votes: 30 16.9%
  • Release Ryzen 7 2800X, based on a revision of the die, taking full advantage of the 12LP process

    Votes: 17 9.6%
  • Something else (specify below)

    Votes: 3 1.7%

  • Total voters
    178

Vattila

Senior member
Oct 22, 2004
363
59
136
#1
As rumoured, Intel's 8-core i9-9900K is around the corner, and it is widely expected that it will surpass Ryzen 7 in both single-thread and multi-thread performance, due to higher IPC and frequency. What will be AMD's response?

If there is no response, and Intel retakes a clear lead, AMD will lose momentum on the desktop until 7nm, which may mean 6 months or more of stagnation.

We know that AMD has reserved the 2800 model number in their line-up, and it seems widely suspected that this may have been done in anticipation of Intel's 8-core. So, I guess many, like me, expect a response.

We also know that AMD's current 12LP die does not fully exploit the 12LP process. In particular, it is exactly the same size as the 14LPP die, and my understanding is that they changed very little of the layout, keeping it mostly unchanged, and took advantage of improved transistors only.

Could it be that this was just a first step, with a more thoroughly redone 12LP revision forthcoming? In particular, there should be opportunity for higher density by using the 12LP design libraries, and a smaller optimised chip may allow higher frequencies. My thinking goes like this: Lisa Su wants a yearly cadence for the 2000-series, but 12LP readiness does not support a full optimisation for the process in time. So she puts two teams on it; one to do a simple transfer of the 14LPP design, using the same libraries, and one to do an optimised shrink using 12LP libraries, and possibly further design optimisations. The first team targets a 2018-Q2 release, while the second targets a refresh coming 6 month later, nicely coinciding with Intel's 8-core launch.

Also, note that "Picasso" is expected as the 12LP refresh of the "Raven Ridge" APU. Presumably, "Picasso" is designed with 12LP libraries for optimal density and efficiency. If so, AMD will have to do the 12LP design work for the CCX anyway.

Pure wishful thinking?
 

teejee

Senior member
Jul 4, 2013
260
6
101
#2
As rumoured, Intel's 8-core i9-9900K is around the corner, and it is widely expected that it will surpass Ryzen 7 in both single-thread and multi-thread performance, due to higher IPC and frequency. What will be AMD's response?

If there is no response, and Intel retakes a clear lead, AMD will lose momentum on the desktop until 7nm, which may mean 6 months or more of stagnation.

We know that AMD has reserved the 2800 model number in their line-up, and it seems widely suspected that this may have been done in anticipation of Intel's 8-core. So, I guess many, like me, expect a response.

We also know that AMD's current 12LP die does not fully exploit the 12LP process. In particular, it is exactly the same size as the 14LPP die, and my understanding is that they changed very little of the layout, keeping it mostly unchanged, and took advantage of improved transistors only.

Could it be that this was just a first step, with a more thoroughly redone 12LP revision forthcoming? In particular, there should be opportunity for higher density by using the 12LP design libraries, and a smaller optimised chip may allow higher frequencies. My thinking goes like this: Lisa Su wants a yearly cadence for the 2000-series, but 12LP readiness does not support a full optimisation for the process in time. So she puts two teams on it; one to do a simple transfer of the 14LPP design, using the same libraries, and one to do an optimised shrink using 12LP libraries, and possibly further design optimisations. The first team targets a 2018-Q2 release, while the second targets a refresh coming 6 month later, nicely coinciding with Intel's 8-core launch.

Also, note that "Picasso" is expected as the 12LP refresh of the "Raven Ridge" APU. Presumably, "Picasso" is designed with 12LP libraries for optimal density and efficiency. If so, AMD will have to do the 12LP design work for the CCX anyway.

Pure wishful thinking?
AMD's response will be very simple, they will adapt the price in order to stay competitive.
Ryzen 3000 series will arrive around Q2 next year.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,381
192
126
#3
We don't know if Intel is going to shift pricing to get closer to AMD prices.
 

kawi6rr

Senior member
Oct 17, 2013
522
24
116
#4
Crossing finger that AMD releases a 2800x that will be competitive against the new Intel chip.
 

The Stilt

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2015
1,709
72
106
#5
Binning Pinnacle Ridge to any extent won't result in any meaningful difference when 8C CFL steps in the ring.
2700X is already hitting all of the imaginable limits (Vmax, Pmax and Tmax). By using the very best silicon AMD probably could release a part with a sustainable 4.1GHz all-core frequency and up to 4.4GHz single core frequency with limited availability, but thats about it.

Its far better to do nothing and to respond with pricing when necessary.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,251
645
136
#6
Threadripper2 ? with 32c/64t
 

piesquared

Golden Member
Oct 16, 2006
1,598
17
136
#9
Response to what? What is a 9900k and where are they for sale?
 

StinkyPinky

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2002
6,352
39
126
#10
Crossing finger that AMD releases a 2800x that will be competitive against the new Intel chip.
I don't think it can be. Their 8 core top out at around 4.2. Even if they sell the golden chips and get them to 4.35, it will still be slower.

I think AMD will just cut prices and ride it out until zen 2 roles around. At that point i expect them to release a 10 or even 12 core mainstream cpu.
 

moonbogg

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2011
9,745
24
126
#11
Yeah I guess it doesn't really matter since that Intel 8 core will cost as much as an Intel 8 core...which is a crap ton of money that no one wants to spend. That's a shame. Its a shame the CPU will cost at least $500. Why even release it? Intel would be better off simply telling us, "We could release an 8 core on mainstream, but NAH". Might as well not release it with how high they will price it. lol. Its fine though. Intel just does Intel.

So, AMD doesn't need to do anything except for continue selling a truck load of 2700X's.
 

richaron

Golden Member
Mar 27, 2012
1,306
1
131
#12
I don't think it can be. Their 8 core top out at around 4.2. Even if they sell the golden chips and get them to 4.35, it will still be slower.

I think AMD will just cut prices and ride it out until zen 2 roles around. At that point i expect them to release a 10 or even 12 core mainstream cpu.
I agree a 2800X wont be competitive with an 8 core intel, or even a noticeable difference from a 2700X. But I still think there's a decent chance of a launch.

I think AMD CPUs are essentially in a holding pattern until Zen 2 on 7nm, but "launching" a "new" 2800X will get a little media and create an excuse for the price shakeup.
 

PhonakV30

Senior member
Oct 26, 2009
940
15
136
#13
8 cores at 5Ghz on socket 1151 not possible.Intel Needs New socket to provide sufficient power.
 
Aug 25, 2001
42,972
384
126
#16
8 cores at 5Ghz on socket 1151 not possible.Intel Needs New socket to provide sufficient power.
That's what I suspect as well. 6 Cores of CFL at 5Ghz, OR, 8 Cores of CFL, at... ??? Ghz? 4.5? Higher? I really doubt 5Ghz though. Maybe Asus will deploy an "OC socket", if such a thing is possible these days. (Happened before.)
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,063
336
136
#17
That's what I suspect as well.
Suspect what? Who said 9900K will run at 5Ghz all-core stock?

Meanwhile people managed to overclock 8700K to 5Ghz on Z170/270 boards, there are even world records based on 8700K & Z170 boards. Going further, the 9900K will be a 33% increase in cores over 8700K, while 8700K brought a 50% increase over 7700K, meaning this new gen will come with a smaller relative power requirement increase.
 

dlerious

Senior member
Mar 4, 2004
647
27
116
#18
Suspect what? Who said 9900K will run at 5Ghz all-core stock?

Meanwhile people managed to overclock 8700K to 5Ghz on Z170/270 boards, there are even world records based on 8700K & Z170 boards. Going further, the 9900K will be a 33% increase in cores over 8700K, while 8700K brought a 50% increase over 7700K, meaning this new gen will come with a smaller relative power requirement increase.
Is there a link to those world records that isn't from VideoCardz, like Gskill or Intel?
 

Sable

Golden Member
Jan 7, 2006
1,093
1
91
#20
Do AMD need to respond? Intel have the fastest gaming CPU already. AMD have the cheaper option for gaming PLUS moar coars stuff. Intel "catching up" with AMD shouldn't give AMD any cores (lol) for concern.

Anyone in the know KNOWS how good Ryzen+ is (FOR TASKS BEYOND GAMING). Everyone else will buy Intel.

And people saying Intel will drop prices are craycray. They know their core (lol) market are "OOHH INTEL OOH 8 SCHMORES, and that means 16 THINGUMIES!!!! I CANZ YOUTUBE FASTEREZ"

AMD? I heard their drivers are bad. If an 8 core 16 shed is this cheap it must suck.

etc etc

AMD are looking good. I want to upgrade but still trying to justify it. If I did right now it would be AMD. And if I was HEDT inclined it would be 100% TR2.

If Intel price match AMD I'll be shocked.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,381
192
126
#21
They know their core (lol) market are "OOHH INTEL OOH 8 SCHMORES, and that means 16 THINGUMIES!!!! I CANZ YOUTUBE FASTEREZ"

AMD? I heard their drivers are bad. If an 8 core 16 shed is this cheap it must suck.
Nice way to have a discussion...
 

richaron

Golden Member
Mar 27, 2012
1,306
1
131
#22
AMD? I heard their drivers are bad. If an 8 core 16 shed is this cheap it must suck.
Nice way to have a discussion...
^ Might seem like trolling but this is legit how many who fall into the anti-AMD mindshare think (CPU or GPU).

And partially why I think AMD will drop prices of current line, perhaps with the help of a 2800X release. Even though I don't think intel will even attempt to price the 8 core consumer part competitively (it will be relatively high) I think if AMD looses the mainstream multi-core advantage it will drive them to push for price advantage until next gen.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,381
192
126
#23
^ Might seem like trolling but this is legit how many who fall into the anti-AMD mindshare think (CPU or GPU).

And partially why I think AMD will drop prices of current line, perhaps with the help of a 2800X release. Even though I don't think intel will even attempt to price the 8 core consumer part competitively (it will be relatively high) I think if AMD looses the mainstream multi-core advantage it will drive them to push for price advantage until next gen.
What's the anti-intel mindshare like?

Just askin'...
 

Charlie22911

Senior member
Mar 19, 2005
525
31
116
#24
For the last decade or so Intel has had AMD beat on absolute performance, so nothing will change in that regard when Intel releases its 8 core mainstream part. I also doubt Intel will adjust pricing of existing product stack, making this new 8 core part quite expensive.

AMD will continue to do what it has done with Zen based products, which is disrupting Intel with a superior price to performance offering.
 

Vattila

Senior member
Oct 22, 2004
363
59
136
#25
Thanks for the replies and votes!

It seems the consensus is that AMD will ride it out, while aiming to beat Intel on pricing. I can see how that could work. If they manage to push 12-core ThreadRipper down to the price of the 8-core 9900K, they could maintain the reputation they have established of providing "more cores at the same price". Gamers seem still content with 4-6 cores, so I guess customers looking for more cores than that would be inclined to consider the TR4 platform.

Even if such aggressive pricing erodes profit margins, it may still be more cost effective than trying to do engineering magic on the 12LP process.

PS. AMD Ryzen ThreadRipper 1920X (12-core) now sells for £532 at Amazon.co.uk. For comparison, Intel Core i7-8800K (6-core) sells for £313.
 

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS