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

[burninatortech4]

It's been said already in this thread but I suspect that any die performing better than 2700x quality are going to Threadripper 2. AMD will drop prices to stay competitive with the 9000 series.

 

[whm1974]

It's been said already in this thread but I suspect that any die that perform better than 2700x quality are going to Threadripper 2. AMD will drop prices to stay competitive with the 9000 series.

AMD doing this makes sense since they will make more money off TH2 then a higher end desktop CPU.

 

[SlowBox]

OK, this is silly. You don't buy a 32 core cpu for gaming, its for productivity. You can only play one game at a time. This is trolling.

Dude, Markfw Im sorry. Why you being soo hard on me, I just joined. Did I really say something that bad to be called a troll ? If so then sorry, if not then no need to call me a troll. All Im saying is 32core is pointless for a gamer. For a DAW or Video Editing or CAD or 3D then ya the cores would kick in. I guess I dozed off to a different subject or way of thinking, I apologize again.


Thank you

 

[Markfw]

Dude, Markfw Im sorry. Why you being soo hard on me, I just joined. Did I really say something that bad to be called a troll ? If so then sorry, if not then no need to call me a troll. All Im saying is 32core is pointless for a gamer. For a DAW or Video Editing or CAD or 3D then ya the cores would kick in. I guess I dozed off to a different subject or way of thinking, I apologize again.


Thank you

First, this thread says nothing about gamers. Next, my comment about 32 core threadripper was for other purposes, but you responded with an insane suggestion, that someone get a 32core, 64 thread CPU for gaming. THATS TROLLING.

 

[Vattila]

I think it's virtually impossible for AMD to release a 2800X that turbos to 4.5GHz+, unless you mean for single core turbos, which is possible, considering a 2700X can already do 4.3GHz.

Back when all we knew was that GlobalFoundries 12LP process would come with a 10% performance improvement, I figured that AMD would target 2800X to hit 4.0 GHz base clock and 4.4 GHz max boost (single core). For reference, 1800X has base 3.6 Ghz and boost 4.0 Ghz, while 2700X has base 3.7 GHz (+3%) and boost 4.3 Ghz (+8%).

This is the basis for my hypothesis in my original post — that they didn't hit this target and is at work to do so by squeezing that 10% improvement out of the 12LP process. But as others have argued, perhaps since Zen 2 is right around the corner and looks really good they are content with 2700X for now.

That said, I still think there is a substantial probability that they have tasked a low-priority team with 2800X, in case there should be any problems bringing Ryzen 3000 to market.

 

[cbn]

8C/16T, large iGPU with HBM type memory, but this is mostly for laptops.

(Essentially they will move a certain part of the mainstream off the desktop by doing this....not overcrowd desktop even more).

 

[PeterScott]

8C/16T, large iGPU with HBM type memory, but this is mostly for laptops.

(Essentially they will move a certain part of the mainstream off the desktop by doing this....not overcrowd desktop even more).

Sure, that's the fantasy part. Now the realistic response?

 

[CatMerc]

Back when all we knew was that GlobalFoundries 12LP process would come with a 10% performance improvement, I figured that AMD would target 2800X to hit 4.0 GHz base clock and 4.4 GHz max boost (single core). For reference, 1800X has base 3.6 Ghz and boost 4.0 Ghz, while 2700X has base 3.7 GHz (+3%) and boost 4.3 Ghz (+8%).

This is the basis for my hypothesis in my original post — that they didn't hit this target and is at work to do so by squeezing that 10% improvement out of the 12LP process. But as others have argued, perhaps since Zen 2 is right around the corner and looks really good they are content with 2700X for now.

That said, I still think there is a substantial probability that they have tasked a low-priority team with 2800X, in case there should be any problems bringing Ryzen 3000 to market.

The financial argument for squeezing out the last few hundred MHz for Pinnacle is not there.

 

[Vattila]

The financial argument for squeezing out the last few hundred MHz for Pinnacle is not there.

On its own I agree. Except if there is a problem bringing 7nm to market. However, if AMD has decided to go ahead with it as Plan B, then releasing it, if it is ready, against Intel's 8-core, may make sense, even if 7nm is on schedule. And as I noted before, AMD presumably needs to do the 12LP design work on the Zen+ CCX anyway for the APU refresh ("Picasso"). So there is substantial overlap there.

 

[Lovec1990]

Based on rumors i heard 9900k will cost 450usd but the main info we need are clocks it will have

 

[Vattila]

Based on rumors i heard 9900k will cost 450usd but the main info we need are clocks it will have

Interesting. Meanwhile, i7-8700K is moving down towards $300. So if AMD wants to play in the price range above that, they will need to win against it, in perceived value, which a 2800X might do.

 

[Lovec1990]

AMDs response for intels 9th gen is Ryzen 3th gen

 

[Vattila]

AMDs response for intels 9th gen is Ryzen 3th gen

When do you think the Ryzen 3000 series will be announced (full specs of initial range), and when do you think it will be launched (initial models in retailer's stock available to buy)? When do you estimate the ramp of manufacturing volume will overtake the current sales volume of the 2000 series? What do you speculate is Plan B, should the launch schedule be delayed for whatever reason?

 

[maddie]

Interesting. Meanwhile, i7-8700K is moving down towards $300. So if AMD wants to play in the price range above that, they will need to win against it, in perceived value, which a 2800X might do.

You're doing a lot of rationalizing for a 2800X.

The present prices ($/mm^2), which is what really matters, are much higher than AMD has seen in many years.

Take for example the TR series. Did they compete for the same price as Intel's HEDT models? Same for EPYC server CPUs. This was in spite of AMD being very competitive.

Also, making money does not have to mean having to compete with all of your competitors products .

Ryzen 3000 series will be the boss, until then, things are good.

 

[Vattila]

Ryzen 3000 series will be the boss, until then, things are good.

I think every good business at this level has a Plan B. "Stick it out with pricing until we get to 7nm", may be it, of course, with multiple options for 7nm manufacture, to safeguard against mishaps. However, mishaps can happen in design as well, e.g. errata that are deemed not shippable.

That said, I think you may very well be right. As long as AMD stays profitable, they are in a much better condition than in their recent history. The ramp of EPYC should ensure that remains the case.

 

[Lovec1990]

When do you think the Ryzen 3000 series will be announced (full specs of initial range), and when do you think it will be launched (initial models in retailer's stock available to buy)? When do you estimate the ramp of manufacturing volume will overtake the current sales volume of the 2000 series? What do you speculate is Plan B, should the launch schedule be delayed for whatever reason?

Ryzen 2nd gen was released in April so we can expect similar with Ryzen 3rd gen.We can defenitly expect 3600,3600X,3700 and 3700X AMD only needs 200mhz clock increase plus alittle IPC increase too compete with 9th gen, but full extend of performance increase becouse of 7nm is unclear atm i read somewere 15% performance increase is expected.Based on info we have Ryzen 3rd gen is on track zen 2 cores are completed they are sampling now.

intel will release 9th gen on 14nm++ or 14nm+++ while Ryzen 3rd gen will be 7nm

 

[whm1974]

I think every good business at this level has a Plan B. "Stick it out with pricing until we get to 7nm", may be it, of course, with multiple options for 7nm manufacture, to safeguard against mishaps. However, mishaps can happen in design as well, e.g. errata that are deemed not shippable.

That said, I think you may very well be right. As long as AMD stays profitable, they are in a much better condition than in their recent history. The ramp of EPYC should ensure that remains the case.

Well AMD's Ryzen has become popular due to the amount of performance they offer for the price. In particular the 2200G and 2600.

 

[Vattila]

Well AMD's Ryzen has become popular due to the amount of performance they offer for the price. In particular the 2200G and 2600.

Very true. Even if Intel overtakes on the top in the mainstream desktop segment, there are AMD models that will have plenty perceived value still. And as mentioned, AMD has other attractive products that are ramping. So AMD should stay well above water until 7nm products are shipping.

 

[whm1974]

Very true. Even if Intel overtakes on the top in the mainstream desktop segment, there are AMD models that will have plenty perceived value still. And as mentioned, AMD has other attractive products that are ramping. So AMD should stay well above water until 7nm products are shipping.

To be honest, I'm not sure that Intel's i7-8700 and upcoming 8 core coffeelake CPUs offer that much performance at their price in comparison to AMD's current offerings right now.

 

[Vattila]

To be honest, I'm not sure that Intel's i7-8700 and upcoming 8 core coffeelake CPUs offer that much performance at their price in comparison to AMD's current offerings right now.

I tend to agree, but the following chart by Ingebor shows the Intel mindshare AMD needs to overcome. As far as I know, there is no shortage of 2700X, and it is priced well below 8800K, but still, by far, the latter is widely seen as a better buy, judging by the sales volume.

https://imgur.com/a/jsUE0qr

 

[french toast]

The financial argument for squeezing out the last few hundred MHz for Pinnacle is not there.

If they have been binning and saving the top 1% that can hit 4.5ghz...then they can charge 399$ for it.

That makes financial sense to me.

 

[Vattila]

If they have been binning and saving the top 1% that can hit 4.5ghz...then they can charge 399$ for it.

Sounds good on the face of it, but the sales rate of the models at the top of the product range in the mainstream desktop segment requires large production capacity, as seen so vividly in Ingebors's chart, otherwise you will get painful shortages (recall the 8800K launch with limited availability). And the cache of harvested chips would have to last until the 3000 series is available in similar quantities. So 1% harvesting rate seems too small.

With such limited production rate, why not just sell these top-binning dies as ThreadRippers at much higher price and lower demand?

 

[PeterScott]

If they have been binning and saving the top 1% that can hit 4.5ghz...then they can charge 399$ for it.

That makes financial sense to me.

I think there is a fundamental logic issue with binning parts for months into the future, and inventorying them (wasted money) until releasing them at some future date when they are worth less money(more wasted money).

If you have higher performance chips, logically you release them now when their selling premium is going to be higher, and you don't have sit on them in inventory for months, paying inventory costs.

If you wait for Intel to release it's 8 core part, they steal your thunder, and they price you can charge will be less.

You lose in multiple ways with that "strategy":

1: Lower selling price.
2: Lower marketing impact in the shadow of Intel's release.
3: Inventory carrying costs.
4: Time value of money losses (You could be earning returns on the money if you had it now, or pay down debt early, and reduce your debt costs).

So no, this does not make financial sense to me.

In tech, not every product gets a response. In fact most don't. Companies deliver products that are at the end of LONG release cycles. Marketing can have responses, in the form of pricing, bundling, advertising campaigns, but products don't really answer other products at the HW level that much.

I expect no HW "response". Eventually there will be a 7nm Ryzen, but it isn't a "response", just AMD executing long standing plans.

The Marketing response will likely highlight AMD price performance, include some minor price shifting, and maybe a 12 core TR/MB combo deal that comes close to 9900K/MB pricing.

 

[Vattila]

If you have higher performance chips, logically you release them now when their selling premium is going to be higher, and you don't have sit on them in inventory for months, paying inventory costs.

Deliberately delaying launch for no other reason than to wait for Intel makes no sense, but I don't think anyone is arguing that.

In the case of the hypothetical 2800X, it might be that AMD just missed their performance target, but has a sound plan in place to improve yields and release 2800X as soon as they have production rate and inventory for launch. If they could be certain there was no 8-core Intel coming, they might have saved themselves the effort and focused all the attention on the next generations. But they probably assumed it would arrive. So, in this scenario, a decision to proceed with 2800X can be seen as a response to Intel.

Competitive analysis is very much in play. AMD does extensive competitive scenario planning, as recently revealed in an interview with SVP Forrest Norrod, where he points out that they planned EPYC 2 based on what they estimated Intel would do on 10nm. And, now that Intel is stumbling, you can be sure that AMD is adjusting to make the most of the situation.
​

products don't really answer other products at the HW level that much.

While this may be the case, it may be a sign of sluggishness, which is a bad trait. Agility, as in the ability to respond quickly to competition, is often lauded in business. So I think it makes much sense to speculate on what competitors plan to do in response to the known or suspected plan of the other.

And to me, speculating on the hardware level is the most fun.
​

 

[William Gaatjes]

I do not really feel that Intel needs to release an 8 core at the moment. The 8700 and the 8700K do quite well in comparison to the 2700x. It is mainly because the base and boost clock is so high.
Also, to be in the same power envelope as AMD, Intel has going to require lowering the voltages and clocks. And then it will be difficult to sell these I9-9900 at a price that is interesting for customers.
Only people who favor Intel above all and all reason, would buy such a chip.
When the 7nm series from AMD comes out, then Intel is going to feel all the heat and they have no longer any choice.