Question Speculation: Ryzen 3000 series pricing

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Speculation: Ryzen 3000 series retail pricing

  • 3700X -> 8 cores at $330, 3800X -> 12 cores at $500, 16 core possibly at higher price.

    Votes: 34 40.5%
  • 3700X -> 12 cores at $330, 3800X -> 16 cores at $500

    Votes: 41 48.8%
  • They are both too expensive. AMD's high end can't cost that much because no one will buy it

    Votes: 4 4.8%
  • They are both too cheap. AMD will go after market share at all cost.

    Votes: 5 6.0%

  • Total voters
    84
Apr 4, 2017
117
167
86
measlytwerp.live
I am just saying that it's being sold as gospel that its memory Latency and I haven't seen anyone but Wendal testing it since the patch. Even the ones that are still an issue. Are we absolutely sure it's memory latency and not Windows being Windows? It just reminds me of the game performance being low because of CCX to CCX latency when Ryzen launched sure it might not help. But there was a lot more wrong including again Windows's schedular. But it became gospel because it was the one thing people could see a major difference in early.
It's definitely not memory latency and just a Windows thing.
 

maddie

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2010
2,521
420
136
Its not far off being that simple.

If AMD have to supply X chips for consoles, then they can devote X+% chips to that order. Anything left over can be either repurposed or sold to the console OEMs anyway later on.

If they have a shortage of Zen2 chiplets - they absolutely will be putting them into the most profitable products first. In which case do not expect to see Ryzen 3 or 5.

*I suppose, if yields were junk and they were harvesting loads - you might see R3/R5 as a means to get these semi-broken chips out the door.



A lower speed with tighter power use is also same as EPYC.
I'm fairly certain that this iteration of the core (Zen2) on 7nm will not be used for the consoles. Being as cost conscious as they have to be, most likely the chips will use 7nm+ which is expected to bring lower cost as one of it's main advantages. EUV, less mask steps, higher yields.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,587
1,042
136
I will also say that much of this 2990wx discussion also is highly influenced by windows. In linux, you don't have near the problem, at least in my experience.
 

Kenmitch

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
7,134
61
126
Some of you guys are speculating in the wrong speculation thread it looks like.
 

Atari2600

Senior member
Nov 22, 2016
731
171
106
Some of you guys are speculating in the wrong speculation thread it looks like.
If we were speculating on Intel, then there is a chance that we might find out what is actually going on.

With AMD? Not so much. :confused:


[Or :D if you are concerned with system security]
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,497
827
126
The posts above mine have speculation that should be in the other speculation thread is all.
Honestly, if @Atari2600 agrees to run some tests with his 2950x, I would be thrilled if he would post the results in the main speculation thread (rather than this price speculation thread).
 

Shivansps

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,468
195
126
Ryzen 3 3200G - 4C/4T - $99

Ryzen 3 3400G - 4C/8T - $149

Ryzen 5 3600 - 6C/12T - $199

Ryzen 5 3600X - 6C/12T - $229

Ryzen 7 3700 - 8C/16T - $299

Ryzen 7 3700X - 8C/16T - $329

Ryzen 9 3800 - 12C/24T - $499

Ryzen 9 3800X - 12C/24T - $529

Ryzen 9 3900 - 16C/32T - $699

Ryzen 9 3900X - 16C/32T - $729
This looks more and more likely by the day, i would add the posibility of a 6C/6T 3500 at $160
 

B-Riz

Senior member
Feb 15, 2011
957
57
91
I think we will see prices trend down for core counts in Zen2, perhaps 8c and 12c release first.

A full stack release makes no sense if they are also selling Zen and Zen+ right now.

Big question is max cores on Zen2, as TR3 still needs some love.
 

B-Riz

Senior member
Feb 15, 2011
957
57
91
Why?

If Zen 2 is as good as people believe, AMD can easily sell 8-cores for $329

Or are you saying that Zen 2 with be underwhelming?
More for less, what was started with the Zen release.

We were told as much in January, double the stuff at the same power.
 
Apr 21, 2017
521
71
86
This looks more and more likely by the day, i would add the posibility of a 6C/6T 3500 at $160
I think 4c/8t might be better overall. More economical, and similar MT.

the product just below 3500 is known: the 3400g, which is a nicely clocked 12nm APU (now known capable of 3.7-4.2GHz)

3500 series line I imagine is the most interesting; imho it may be heterogeneous, and include 12nm and 7nm products.

3500 series sku's is where I imagine the bottom priced bottom binned 7nm to arrive at eventually (~early November). This will be a dumping ground for bottom bin 7nm die salvage, coming in the form of 4c/8t. Still, these should clock better than medium bin 12nm.

upper 3500 series (12nm parts) would be higher core count and be much superior in MT (while loosing much less in ST), so these would occupy the higher numbers of the 3500 series:

Here is a hypothetical (rough guess) desktop portion of the product line:

3200g 3.6-3.9 4c/4t 8CU ryzen 3 [now known as 3.6-4.0GHz]
3300g 3.4-3.8 4c/8t 8CU ryzen 3
3400g 3.8-4.1 4c/8t 11CU ryzen 5 [now known as 3.7-4.2GHz]
3500 4.0-4.3 4c/8t 7nm ryzen 5
3500x 4.2-4.5 4c/8t 7nm ryzen 5
3565 3.5-4.0 6c/12t 0CU ryzen 5
3585 3.0-4.0 8c/16t 0CU ryzen 7

3600 4.0-4.5 6c/12t 7nm ryzen 7
3700 4.3-4.7 6c/12t 7nm ryzen 7
3800 4.1-4.7 8c/16t 7nm ryzen 7
3800x 4.4-4.8 8c/16t 7nm ryzen 7
3920x 4.2-4.8 12c/24t 7nm ryzen 9 (paper launch)
The hypothetical 3585 would be a much less aggressive binning than the high binned 2700 (3.2-4.1) and 2700x (3.7-4.3); this would allow PR to achieve much greater 8c yields. I imagine 65W with ctdp up 95W and XFR enabled.

The 3500 line would also occupy the upper end of the high volume $150-$200 price range.

I imagine the 3400g would be priced slighty above $150, close to the 3500x, while the 3500 would be priced at or slightly below $150.

3200g would be at ~$115.
 
Last edited:

B-Riz

Senior member
Feb 15, 2011
957
57
91
What if they do 8c, 10c, 12c for the initial release? The "new" G APU's are a year behind on process, so, do they really count?

We have heard nothing about boards for B550.

The Zen+ spin was really just 6 and 8 core AM4 released and TR2 refresh, but no 1900X replacement.

I would think, at some point, they would need to stop selling 1000 and 2000 series.

TR3 should theoretically *at least* get a 48c, as TR2 has 32c.

BECAUSE, what if yields are good enough that the 8c is the default?
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,497
827
126
What if they do 8c, 10c, 12c for the initial release? The "new" G APU's are a year behind on process, so, do they really count?
It's going to get a little bit weird this year with 12nm and 7nm products both occupying the 3xxx name space. We still don't know exact SKUs, but as many have pointed out, there are some 12nm APUs in that group. And yes, it seems logical that AMD is going to release 8c-12c 7nm chips as part of the 3xxx series in July. 8c chips will actually be at the bottom of the 7nm stack and in the middle of the entire 3xxx stack. We could see overclockable $250 8c chips on 7nm. They'll probably be down-binned but I would not be surprised at all to see such an SKU.
 
Jun 2, 2009
4,054
153
126
What if they do 8c, 10c, 12c for the initial release?
I assume same limitations apply, eg same number of cores per ccx must be active which makes 10c an impossible option. 8c => 1 chiplet, 12c = 2 chiplets with 3 cores per ccx (total of 4 ccx). So 6, 8 an 12 are much more likely options.
 

B-Riz

Senior member
Feb 15, 2011
957
57
91
I assume same limitations apply, eg same number of cores per ccx must be active which makes 10c an impossible option. 8c => 1 chiplet, 12c = 2 chiplets with 3 cores per ccx (total of 4 ccx). So 6, 8 an 12 are much more likely options.
Right. My thought is, is the process so good no CCX has a bad core? If there is 1,2,3 bad cores, would they scrap the whole CCX?
 

Shivansps

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,468
195
126
I think 4c/8t might be better overall. More economical, and similar MT.

the product just below 3500 is known: the 3400g, which is a nicely clocked 12nm APU (now known capable of 3.7-4.2GHz)

3500 series line I imagine is the most interesting; imho it may be heterogeneous, and include 12nm and 7nm products.

3500 series sku's is where I imagine the bottom priced bottom binned 7nm to arrive at eventually (~early November). This will be a dumping ground for bottom bin 7nm die salvage, coming in the form of 4c/8t. Still, these should clock better than medium bin 12nm.

upper 3500 series (12nm parts) would be higher core count and be much superior in MT (while loosing much less in ST), so these would occupy the higher numbers of the 3500 series:
AMD has a big problem called I5-9400F at around 150-180, the 3400G a Zen+ is just not enoght, even at a lower price, you can get a 9400F for as little has $150 right now and AMD cant hope to compite with that with the 3400G.

I think they need the 6c/6t at $150.
 
Aug 25, 2001
43,598
537
126
I think they need the 6c/6t at $150.
No, the i5-9400F is $150 right now at Newegg, AMD needs a 6C/6T cheaper than Intel. Given people with no strong preference, and equal prices, most people have been inundated with Intel marketing, and will subconsciously choose Intel in that situation. I don't want to see that happen.

I'm voting for AMD Ryzen 3000-series 6C/6T for $120.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,322
223
126
My opinion is that AMD won't go lower than $150 at launch, but it would start at 6C12T.

Anyone want to guess how many cores the 7 nm APU will have? I'm guessing it would have to be 6 at least, given the Comet Lake rumors.
 

amd6502

Senior member
Apr 21, 2017
521
71
86
TR3 should theoretically *at least* get a 48c, as TR2 has 32c.
2000 series CPU's will complement the 3000 series. The top hitters, 2600x, 2700x, and 2700 should continue selling alongside.

Likewise the TR 2000 series will complement the 3000 series, which in my opinion will max out at 16c or 24c. The 2990WX with its extra compute cores may remain MT champ for many workloads, but a 16c or 24c will appeal wider, due to its uniform latency (no main/compute core division) and doubled FPU capability, and should still come close, even sometimes beat the 2990WX in MT, due to significantly higher base clock of 7nm. The TR3000 line will probably also be much smaller, with two or three sku's only.

This staggered approach makes the last generation remain relevant and needed. The leading edge gets the high margins and premium while the trailing edge complements the leading edge and fills in some important niches. The latter also gives the developer a large range of options in pricing.

AMD has a big problem called I5-9400F at around 150-180, the 3400G a Zen+ is just not enoght, even at a lower price, you can get a 9400F for as little has $150 right now and AMD cant hope to compite with that with the 3400G.

I think they need the 6c/6t at $150.
7nm chiplets and cores are far too in demand this year. A more economical option would be a 2700 rebin with SMT disabled: 8c/8t, XFR enabled, and possibly a 100MHz frequency upgrade. (Or alternately: the same for 2600, 6c/6t but with 2700's freqs). A PR refresh and adjustments on binning with a few new SKUs just makes a lot of sense; PR is a very very good design. I'll go further and say it's a classic that may remain very relevant and in production for the next few years.
 
Last edited:
Feb 12, 2017
692
400
106
No, the i5-9400F is $150 right now at Newegg, AMD needs a 6C/6T cheaper than Intel. Given people with no strong preference, and equal prices, most people have been inundated with Intel marketing, and will subconsciously choose Intel in that situation. I don't want to see that happen.

I'm voting for AMD Ryzen 3000-series 6C/6T for $120.
No need.

Just drop the price of the Ryzen 5 2600 to $139
 
Last edited:

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS