Question What does it mean, when the *lowest* CPU in your (consumer/mainstream) lineup is $300+? Yes, looking at you AM5. But this is really a larger question.

[VirtualLarry]

What if Intel, in pursuit of "the fastest consumer desktop CPU", stopped selling their designed-for-laptop "desktop" CPUs, and only started selling their HEDT line for consumer desktops, starting at $500 for an 8-core desktop CPU?

Where does this arm-race end?

I mean, I get it, R&D is expensive, and gamers dominate the DIY Desktop PC market, and surveys show that they often purchase towards the top-end chip, but is Intel 12th-Gen going to be "the last" generation of consumer CPUs available around the $100-110 price-point? (Speaking of the 12100F here.)

AMD's 4100 is no-where to be found.

Is this the beginning of the end for "cheap chips for all"?

 

[TheELF]

What is your actual point? That Intel has fallen on hard times because the FTC prevented them from innovating? Please. We all know what happened to Intel: they gutted their engineering team slowly but surely while stumbling in new markets.

I wouldn't exactly call it "hard times" but they did go from making around 10bil on average to making around 20 bil on average per year as soon as they weren't constrained by AMD anymore.

We all know what happened to Intel: they gutted their engineering team slowly but surely while stumbling in new markets.

Then how did they manage to make ALD in less than 4 years if they have a crap engineering team?

I think the point he might be trying to make is that Intel has everything ready but it is SOOOO cutting edge and awesome that bringing it to market WOULD put AMD out of business. Hence, they have to hold back and let AMD thrive a bit to avoid billions in FTC fines.

I'm not talking about now but about the time amd only had FX on the market.
We have all seen how fast intel threw a few more cores to their existing design to easily keep up with zen, what exactly would be the reason that intel couldn't have done the same a year or two earlier when amd only had FX?
It wasn't even anything awesome, there wasn't even any innovation involved, you believe they didn't do it because of greed, or at least the person I first responded to believed that, but if you look at how much money intel made after zen it's just as believable that they didn't do it to keep amd alive.

Frankly, this is the most fun theory I've heard yet about the troubles with Intel's execution. I guess if we applied this to sports, the fastest runner would have to slow down just before the finish line so the others can catch up

Did you ever watch any sports?!
Do you know how often they forbid some sport equipment like running shoes or bathing suits/caps because they are just too good and hurt the competition?!

Banned Performance Enhancing Sports Equipment: From Flying Shoes to Supersuits and Belly Putters | Betting Offers UK

In theory, sport should be a fair battle between two individuals or teams of combatants, with best man, woman or team eventually reigning supreme. However, over time the goalposts have been shifted to give certain athletes a genuine advantage over the rest of the field. And we’re not talking...

www.betting-offers.com

 

[Schmide]

Contrary to above, you can be a monopoly. You just can't use artificial means to maintain that monopoly.

 

[Kocicak]

Intelectual property laws (patents) exist to PROTECT THE AUTHORS OF INNOVATION AGAINST COMPETITION and let them reap rewards for their efforts.

If you invent something and patent it you are a state protected monopoly for 20 years.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I wouldn't exactly call it "hard times" but they did go from making around 10bil on average to making around 20 bil on average per year as soon as they weren't constrained by AMD anymore.

You really believe that it was them holding back? Ooooookay.

Then how did they manage to make ALD in less than 4 years if they have a crap engineering team?

Not really bragable there, buddy, considering all the crap they had to go through to get to the point that one of their 10nm nodes actually worked for a desktop CPU.

 

[TheELF]

Contrary to above, you can be a monopoly. You just can't use artificial means to maintain that monopoly.

Even if you are not a monopoly at all, the FTC can decide that it wants to split your company up, MS just narrowly avoided it by going to appeal, they were already ruled to split up, and this was just because their product was too good and had too much stuff, browsers where sold back then and MS had the audacity to give one away for free.

Why Did Microsoft Face Antitrust Charges in 1998?

Discover why the Department of Justice filed antitrust charges against Microsoft in 1998 over alleged monopolistic actions and how the company reacted.

www.investopedia.com

You really believe that it was them holding back? Ooooookay.

You really believe that they couldn't have released something that could have destroyed the FX line up?!
Double ooooookay.

Not really bragable there, buddy, considering all the crap they had to go through to get to the point that one of their 10nm nodes actually worked for a desktop CPU.

Going through the crap of making twice the money as normally? Oh no! Poor company, making so much money.

 

[DrMrLordX]

You really believe that they couldn't have released something that could have destroyed the FX line up?!

They already did destroy the entire FX lineup.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

They already did destroy the entire FX lineup.

I can't believe you had to even type that.

I was able to buy an FX8350 NIB for under $100. You couldn't get a locked i3 for that. AMD didn't want to almost give them away, they had to.

I am not a pro, enthusiast, or even well read about microprocessor architecture and manufacturing. So I will rely on Cunningham's law here. I want to see a RDNA2 APU for AM4 desktop. Anyone that knows me, is aware of my thing for APUs.

I will be first in line for one of those. I would be all -

And the reason everyone outside the U.S. is confirming Ryzen 4100 availability, is because it sucks. No one should buy it unless it drops to 10100f pricing i.e. $60.

 

[ryanjagtap]

Just my thoughts on this thread. Calling these recently launched zen 4 products mainstream/consumer products seems to be a misnomer. These are enthusiast level CPUs meant to shock and awe the public with their performance even though the hexa-core CPU seems to be mainstream. The mainstream CPUs would trickle down slowly down the line (maybe 2 quarters later) with a lower TDP rating and lower base and boost clocks with wider availability of cheaper DDR5 RAM and budget B650 motherboards. [I don't know for sure, just a guess. But it would be bad if these are the only offering from AMD]

 

[Schmide]

Even if you are not a monopoly at all, the FTC can decide that it wants to split your company up, MS just narrowly avoided it by going to appeal, they were already ruled to split up, and this was just because their product was too good and had too much stuff, browsers where sold back then and MS had the audacity to give one away for free.

Why Did Microsoft Face Antitrust Charges in 1998?

Discover why the Department of Justice filed antitrust charges against Microsoft in 1998 over alleged monopolistic actions and how the company reacted.

www.investopedia.com

Way to misrepresent. Not worth arguing but bundled with software is not free. Side rant. Buy one get one free is not free it's two for the price of one.

Best to read the actual filing and not some invest-o-site.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

I am not a pro, enthusiast, or even well read about microprocessor architecture and manufacturing. So I will rely on Cunningham's law here. I want to see a RDNA2 APU for AM4 desktop. Anyone that knows me, is aware of my thing for APUs.

AMD could well pull a Carrizo on FM2 here. It's not unheard of.

I will be first in line for one of those. I would be all -

And the reason everyone outside the U.S. is confirming Ryzen 4100 availability, is because it sucks. No one should buy it unless it drops to 10100f pricing i.e. $60.

Getting both those memes, I suddenly feel old. Can't imagine why.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

AMD could well pull a Carrizo on FM2 here. It's not unheard of.



Getting both those memes, I suddenly feel old. Can't imagine why.

I like the way you think.

Yeah! Who's old?

As to that $299 price tag on the 7600X, it will have basic RDNA2 iGPU with robust media capabilities. That adds some additional value over the 5600X for the same MSRP. Take inflation into account, and it is a discount by comparison.

 

[Abwx]

According to Lisa Su AM4 is here to stay :

Dr. Lisa Su and the company affirmed that motherboard fellows for AMD have constructed another 500 new board designs that will be compatible with the previous generation.

AMD AM4 Platform to be supported for much longer, software support & new hardware hinted?

Like may companies, AMD will continue to support AM4 platform for several more years, with the hint at new designs on the horizon.

wccftech.com

 

[Rigg]

What does it mean, when the *lowest* CPU in your (consumer/mainstream) lineup is $300+?

It means that $300 is the MSRP and is clearly too high for 6 core in 2022. MSRP is an acronym in which the S stands for suggested. Historically that suggestion hasn't remained relevant for very long after launch. It means the full lineup hasn't been released yet. It means that your 2 year old CPU's and 5 year old platform are still compelling options in the sub $300 price tier after being heavily discounted from their launch MSRP. It means the $300 MSRP entry point is exactly the same as it was for the previous gen. It means MSRP has been set higher on a per core basis for 6/8 core models than for 12/16 core models to entice more people to invest in the higher tier CPU's. It means you have wiggle room to cut prices if your competition undercuts your MSRP with a more compelling option.

 

[crashtech]

It means that $300 is the MSRP and is clearly too high for 6 core in 2022...

I don't think there is any substantiation for this assertion, unless what AMD claims about the 7600X is untrue, namely that it handily beats Intel's current flagship in most games.

 

[Rigg]

I don't think there is any substantiation for this assertion, unless what AMD claims about the 7600X is untrue, namely that it handily beats Intel's current flagship in most games.

It was really more of an opinion than an assertion. That being said, it's $120 more than a 5600x currently sells for and it really doesn't make for a particularly bad assertion.

 

[Markfw]

It was really more of an opinion than an assertion. That being said, it's $120 more than a 5600x currently sells for and it really doesn't make for a particularly bad assertion.

First, it has a much better IGP than anything Intel (I could be wrong, but at least it has one) and is definitely faster than a 5600x, so its definitely worth $120 more.

 

[VirtualLarry]

As to that $299 price tag on the 7600X, it will have basic RDNA2 iGPU with robust media capabilities. That adds some additional value over the 5600X for the same MSRP. Take inflation into account, and it is a discount by comparison.

Hmmm... that's one perspective.

Another perspective is, Intel has been selling Celeron and Pentium CPUs, for years, with the current-gen CPU arch (*usually), also WITH iGPU that also have "robust media capabilities" (for a client system, not nec. content-creation), without huge price premiums attached for doing so.

(*) Rocket Lake generation, didn't introduce any new lower-end RKL Celeron / Pentiums, Intel just kept selling (socket-compat.) Comet Lake Celeron / Pentiums.

IOW, it seems hardly relevant that, finally, the addition of a "basic" (non-gaming) iGPU into the IOD, is worth so much of a premium over Zen3, that it justifies a $300 price-point for the 7600X. Just my perspective. I also think, that given the early-adopter tax, that many early adopters may opt for the higher-tier Zen4 CPUs if they're going whole-hog on AM5, and that the "lowly" (not really, I guess in performance, it can outrun the 12900K at stock in some games?) will drop in price after introduction, not the least because of Intel 13th-gen coming out too.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I don't think there is any substantiation for this assertion, unless what AMD claims about the 7600X is untrue, namely that it handily beats Intel's current flagship in most games.

I am conflicted on that point. What we have seen play out over the last decade is that CPUs with a thread count that matches consoles have aged better than those with lower thread counts. And as hard as it is for some of our crowd to accept, most people keep their PCs until they can no longer handle what they are asked to do. So while the 7600X may look great in bar charts from major reviewers that test games without playing them, how well will it age?

Example: Spiderman with raytracing is so CPU heavy that a 12400 can't maintain 60fps all the time. Will the 7600X be able to handle future console ports targeting PS5 and Series X smoothly all the time? If not, is $300 a good price for a "gaming centric CPU"?

Another example: The old i3 and i5 looked great in Witcher 3 reviews where they goof around early in the game. But once you hit Novigrad and some of the DLC stuff, frame pacing starts getting ugly. I tell myself that it isn't a big deal since most of the time it's fine. Yet I also get salty any time I am thinking about bad game performance, because it breaks immersion.

Realistically, we all know it depends on what games you play. And there are plenty of gamers that the 7600X will be overkill for. However, there are also plenty that if asked which games they want to play, say "Yes". What do they mean by that? They want the ability to play any and all games smoothly and enjoyably in all their glory. If the last decade continues to trend, and Spiderman is an indication of what's to come? It is decidedly safer to go 16 threads, even if the 12 threads are potent. At which point, $300 for 12 threads feel expensive. YMMV.

 

[Asterox]

And the reason everyone outside the U.S. is confirming Ryzen 4100 availability, is because it sucks. No one should buy it unless it drops to 10100f pricing i.e. $60.

This is R3 4350G with broken Vega 6 iGPU, and there is no VCN hardware as expected.

It is better to put it up for sale, than to throw it in the trash.

There were a huge number(India, China, Pakistan etc) of cheap OEM computers on the market, based around the R3 Pro 4350G.Unlike a cheap Intel 4/8 CPU(iGPU is trash X2), you can at least do ok iGPU gaming on Vega 6.

- R5 1600/16mb L3 cache vs R3 4350G/4mb L3 cache

Few would complain, if this was R3 Pro 4350G for 120 euro.AMD VCN hardware is very useful for a variety of video applications.

Procesori | AMD Ryzen procesori | ADM računala

ADM Računala Web Trgovina, prilaz V. Brajkovića 4, 10000 Zagreb - prodaja vrhunskih računala i opreme po najboljim cijenama!

www.adm.hr

 

[VirtualLarry]

How much will OEMs building Zen4 business desktops have to pay for a 7600X, if it allows them to skip shipping a dGPU with the system (but requires them to splash out of DDR5.)

I mean, maybe some of the thought of the built-in premium revolves around being able to ship business desktops without dGPU.

Edit: Moreso than "gamer value" of current performance relative to i9-12900K.

 

[VirtualLarry]

You know, if AMD added a feature, to allow streaming / recording using the Zen4 IOD iGPU media block, while using a dGPU for gameplay, that would be a killer feature for Zen4, IMHO.

They would have a leg up on Nvidia then.

Edit: For example, a feature for this fellow:

Question - Which graphics card is better to upgrade for my PC ?

Which graphics card is better to upgrade for my PC ? My PC spec : 2017 Rig Ryzen7 1700 Wraith Spire Msi B350 Tomahawk Gskill TridentZ 3200mhz 16gb(8*2) Msi RX 480 Armor 8GB OC Capture card elgato 4K60 Pro mk.2 WD Black 1tb 7200rpm Samsung SSD EVO 850 240gb ADATA XPG GAMMIX S11 Pro 1 TB...

forums.anandtech.com

What would even be MORE KILLER, if somehow, they could produce lines of mobos that were "streamer ready", with an HDMI IN port, that gamers could plug their console into, and have "a direct hardware line in" to the media-encoding pipeline on the Zen4 iGPU.

They take about PC demand decline, honestly, I can see "built-in motherboard capture support (*requires compatible CPU/APU with media-encode capabilities)" to be a feature that many might upgrade their PCs for.

AMD, I give you permission to use my idea.

Edit: This would create "market synergy" between AMD-powered PCs, and AMD-powered consoles, by encouraging owners of one, to buy the other to complement the features.

 

[crashtech]

I am conflicted on that point. What we have seen play out over the last decade is that CPUs with a thread count that matches consoles have aged better than those with lower thread counts. And as hard as it is for some of our crowd to accept, most people keep their PCs until they can no longer handle what they are asked to do. So while the 7600X may look great in bar charts from major reviewers that test games without playing them, how well will it age?

Example: Spiderman with raytracing is so CPU heavy that a 12400 can't maintain 60fps all the time. Will the 7600X be able to handle future console ports targeting PS5 and Series X smoothly all the time? If not, is $300 a good price for a "gaming centric CPU"?

Another example: The old i3 and i5 looked great in Witcher 3 reviews where they goof around early in the game. But once you hit Novigrad and some of the DLC stuff, frame pacing starts getting ugly. I tell myself that it isn't a big deal since most of the time it's fine. Yet I also get salty any time I am thinking about bad game performance, because it breaks immersion.

Realistically, we all know it depends on what games you play. And there are plenty of gamers that the 7600X will be overkill for. However, there are also plenty that if asked which games they want to play, say "Yes". What do they mean by that? They want the ability to play any and all games smoothly and enjoyably in all their glory. If the last decade continues to trend, and Spiderman is an indication of what's to come? It is decidedly safer to go 16 threads, even if the 12 threads are potent. At which point, $300 for 12 threads feel expensive. YMMV.

You make really good points here, and many may well opt for the 7700X or wait for the rumoured 7800X.

 

[crashtech]

How much will OEMs building Zen4 business desktops have to pay for a 7600X, if it allows them to skip shipping a dGPU with the system (but requires them to splash out of DDR5.)

I mean, maybe some of the thought of the built-in premium revolves around being able to ship business desktops without dGPU.

Edit: Moreso than "gamer value" of current performance relative to i9-12900K.

Just a guess, but I think there won't be any 7600X-based business desktops. Virtually all the office desktops I worked on were lower-end than that. I think Intel owns and have owned that space for many years. I'd be pleased to be proven wrong, though.

 

[Rigg]

I think we might be reading too much into the 7600x beating the 12900k at gaming thing. They only showed 5 games. Only 2 showed gains above margin of error. Rainbow Six and F1 games have been pretty favorable to Zen 3. At the risk of sounding like an Intel apologist I think these favorable showings might be a bit cherry picked.

Spoiler

 

[VirtualLarry]

AMD Zen 4's AVX-512 Instructions To Show Major Benefits In Emulators Such As Yuzu, Citra, Xenia & Vita3K

A Graphics Engineer from Riot Games has said that AMD's Zen 4 CPUs with AVX-512 can bring major benefits to emulators such as Yuzu

wccftech.com

Maybe AVX512 support fleshes out the $300 "premium" for the 7600X.