WAN show news on Ryzen

[Guest]

The most interesting info I've heard yet. I would be surprised if they didn't charge a fair sum for the 8/16 variant with how capable it seems to have proven. 

 

AMD has a chance to really shift the market with this release and poses the most interesting time in the last couple of years in regard to releases with both Ryzen and Vega on the horizon. 

 

Clock speeds Linus is reporting may also cause some controversy with the previously mentioned bump to 3.6 base clock that reports were bringing in. Either way, AMD hasn't been this competitive with Intel since pre-2012, IMO. 

 

 

[LeChef]

*Wan show

[os2wiz]

Linus screwed up reporting Ryzen at CES running at 3,4 GHZ when it was  definitely running at 3.6 GHZ and at 3.9 GHZ with turbo boost.

[Dash Lambda]

I know the chip is good, I just want to price ;-;

Not that other info is bad, it's just... I want to buy it, but I don't know if I really want to buy it yet because I NEED THE GODDAMN PRICE.

 

... As for the info we do have, I think they should've added a few more PCIe lanes. 24 is fine, it'll serve my needs just fine, but 32 would've been an ideal number.

[cj09beira]

20 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

I know the chip is good, I just want to price ;-;

Not that other info is bad, it's just... I want to buy it, but I don't know if I really want to buy it yet because I NEED THE GODDAMN PRICE.

 

... As for the info we do have, I think they should've added a few more PCIe lanes. 24 is fine, it'll serve my needs just fine, but 32 would've been an ideal number.

being 24 lanes means that its better than z270 without being too mush, more lanes means complex boards, which means higher prices for everyone, and most people wouldn't

use it, same goes for quad channel memory 

[Vode]

This sounds really goo. I can't wait to see the first 14nm Zen APUs. Will propably buy a Laptop when they drop.

[WereCat]

54 minutes ago, os2wiz said:

Linus screwed up reporting Ryzen at CES running at 3,4 GHZ when it was  definitely running at 3.6 GHZ and at 3.9 GHZ with turbo boost.

And how do you know this?

Nvm..saw this 

 

[Sparviero]

Just want AMD to release their CPU/GPU 2017 offensive already. Intel and nVidia seem to be on pause until they have concrete knowledge of what AMD is doing. Or at least plausible deniability of what AMD is doing that can survive SEC scrutiny.

[Doobeedoo]

Excited to see final clock speeds of retail units. So far clock speed improvements are great. 

[ShiftyFella]

Only quadros can drive that 8k dell monitor? Sounds weird as rx480 has couple of dp 1.4 and 1080 has 1.4 dp as well, so you would assume they could drive it

[MoonSpot]

8 hours ago, cj09beira said:

being 24 lanes means that its better than z270 without being too mush, more lanes means complex boards, which means higher prices for everyone, and most people wouldn't

use it, same goes for quad channel memory 

I do and don't agree.  I think a lot of consumers would like to have the lines available for future expansion and are willing to pay a bit more for the flexibility, but not a lot more.  I don't think business gives a fig in general(until it's too late and they need it) and are quite content with the lowest feature sets available. 

Intels split on lanes has been a real pain in the butt IMO, the delta is a bit too extreme.  I want to be able to hook more crap up to the computer than consumer grade allows over the life of the system, but am unwilling to pay the exorbitant amounts for x99.  In this instance I completely agree with Linus' sentiment.

[DarkBlade2117]

@AlexokanAMD wants to get back into the CPU market. The 6900k ect are extremely overpriced for their capabilities. The SR7 will be $350-$600. The latest rumors I've heard are $350-$400

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

@AlexokanAMD wants to get back into the CPU market. The 6900k ect are extremely overpriced for their capabilities. The SR7 will be $350-$600. The latest rumors I've heard are $350-$400

If the 8/16 can do 90% of what the 6900k can do, I we won't be seeing it for that price. If it is actually more like a competitor of the 7700k, then sure. 

[DarkBlade2117]

6 minutes ago, Alexokan said:

If the 8/16 can do 90% of what the 6900k can do, I we won't be seeing it for that price. If it is actually more like a competitor of the 7700k, then sure. 

That's not AMD's goal. They want to bring the price down in the market. The 6900k has an insane price inflation.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

That's not AMD's goal. They want to bring the price down in the market. The 6900k has an insane price inflation.

Undercutting profits to do what? make a point? Not going to happen to the extent you are envisioning. 

[DarkBlade2117]

Just now, Alexokan said:

Undercutting profits to do what? make a point? Not going to happen to the extent you are envisioning. 

The SR7 won't be more then $600. They aren't going to release an entire CPU lineup and have the cheapest one be a 4c/8t one at $250-$300. They are directly targeting the mainstream market which is the Z170/270 platform.

[Gibbons]

11 hours ago, os2wiz said:

Linus screwed up reporting Ryzen at CES running at 3,4 GHZ when it was  definitely running at 3.6 GHZ and at 3.9 GHZ with turbo boost.

 

3.4GHz with no boost.

 

[dizmo]

11 hours ago, Dash Lambda said:

I know the chip is good, I just want to price ;-;

Not that other info is bad, it's just... I want to buy it, but I don't know if I really want to buy it yet because I NEED THE GODDAMN PRICE.

 

... As for the info we do have, I think they should've added a few more PCIe lanes. 24 is fine, it'll serve my needs just fine, but 32 would've been an ideal number.

What would you do with all of those PCIe lanes?

54 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

That's not AMD's goal. They want to bring the price down in the market. The 6900k has an insane price inflation.

AMD is a corporation. Their goal is to make money. You do this with higher margins.

48 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

The SR7 won't be more then $600. They aren't going to release an entire CPU lineup and have the cheapest one be a 4c/8t one at $250-$300. They are directly targeting the mainstream market which is the Z170/270 platform.

I think $700 is a more plausible number. $400 is way too low, and they'd be shooting themselves in the foot if they took away that much potential income. AMD isn't a super healthy company, and if they want to grow they're going to need those extra dollars to put into R&D.

[Dash Lambda]

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

What would you do with all of those PCIe lanes?

I currently have a 980ti, 780, and a 950 Pro in my system. I'd like to have 16 lanes to the 980ti, 8 lanes to the 780, and 4 lanes to the 950 Pro.

(I actually currently have 2 lanes to the 950 Pro. 2 PCIe-2.0 lanes. From the DMI. It's not a happy drive.)

[AresKrieger]

4 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

I currently have a 980ti, 780, and a 950 Pro in my system. I'd like to have 16 lanes to the 980ti, 8 lanes to the 780, and 4 lanes to the 950 Pro.

(I actually currently have 2 lanes to the 950 Pro. 2 PCIe-2.0 lanes. From the DMI. It's not a happy drive.)

Thats more than 24

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

I'd like to have 16 lanes to the 980ti

While GPUs have used 16 lane interfaces for the lols, the 980Ti doesn't benefit from having more than 8 lanes of PCIe 3.0. So far, no card that is realistically considered by AMD's target audience would benefit from 16 lanes.

[dizmo]

8 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

I currently have a 980ti, 780, and a 950 Pro in my system. I'd like to have 16 lanes to the 980ti, 8 lanes to the 780, and 4 lanes to the 950 Pro.

(I actually currently have 2 lanes to the 950 Pro. 2 PCIe-2.0 lanes. From the DMI. It's not a happy drive.)

Even though the difference in performance is negligible?

[Dash Lambda]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

While GPUs have used 16 lane interfaces for the lols, the 980Ti doesn't benefit from having more than 8 lanes of PCIe 3.0. So far, no card that is realistically considered by AMD's target audience would benefit from 16 lanes.

Actually, I did notice a slight impact on performance from cutting the lanes to 8. Nothing big at all, but a consistent drop.

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

Even though the difference in performance is negligible?

The difference in performance is small, but I'd still rather not have it.

5 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

That's more than 24.

...

... Yes. That is more than 24. Very good job.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Dash Lambda said:

Actually, I did notice a slight impact on performance from cutting the lanes to 8. Nothing big at all, but a consistent drop.

Unless you moved from PCIe 3.0 x16 to 2.0 x8, there should be no impact on performance, unless there is an issue with your CPU or mainboard.

Even then, a frame or two of difference doesn't really justify the jump to another platform or a more expensive component.

[Memories4K]

12 hours ago, os2wiz said:

Linus screwed up reporting Ryzen at CES running at 3,4 GHZ when it was  definitely running at 3.6 GHZ and at 3.9 GHZ with turbo boost.

 

11 hours ago, WereCat said:

And how do you know this?

Nvm..saw this 

 

Linus prefaced it by saying that it's the same machine used in a much older demo