Jump to content

AMD Ryzen Full Lineup Prices, Specs & Clock Speeds Leaked

i_build_nanosuits
On 12.2.2017 at 7:16 PM, PCGuy_5960 said:

But AMD is a company trying to make money... I see no reason why they wouldn't charge at least $700 for it, if it can *truly* compete with a 6900K.....

AMD wants to make money but there thought is to make it with lots of users not in an over price product, Intel are great but are way more expensive. I belive that the pricing is right because that how all the users have the chance to buy a good CPU especialy those who want to play but don't want to spend over a 1000$ on a PC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, shairene said:

AMD wants to make money but there thought is to make it with lots of users not in an over price product, Intel are great but are way more expensive. I belive that the pricing is right because that how all the users have the chance to buy a good CPU especialy those who want to play but don't want to spend over a 1000$ on a PC

AMD could still sell those people lower end SKUs. In the past, AMD has always been price competitive with Intel, and more recently even said they don't want to be known as the cheaper brand anymore. So there really isn't any reason for them to undercut Intel by so much.

PSU Tier List | CoC

Gaming Build | FreeNAS Server

Spoiler

i5-4690k || Seidon 240m || GTX780 ACX || MSI Z97s SLI Plus || 8GB 2400mhz || 250GB 840 Evo || 1TB WD Blue || H440 (Black/Blue) || Windows 10 Pro || Dell P2414H & BenQ XL2411Z || Ducky Shine Mini || Logitech G502 Proteus Core

Spoiler

FreeNAS 9.3 - Stable || Xeon E3 1230v2 || Supermicro X9SCM-F || 32GB Crucial ECC DDR3 || 3x4TB WD Red (JBOD) || SYBA SI-PEX40064 sata controller || Corsair CX500m || NZXT Source 210.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

AMD could still sell those people lower end SKUs. In the past, AMD has always been price competitive with Intel, and more recently even said they don't want to be known as the cheaper brand anymore. So there really isn't any reason for them to undercut Intel by so much.

I belive that AMD wants to attract as many new users because they think they have a good product. Also if the new RYZEN CPU's will be at least 80% as good as Intel's CPU's at the half of a price or at a 2/3 it's a lot. Now we need to wait for it to come out see the price and the benchmarks so we can decide if it wa worth it. Myself I think that AMD will give a good fight to Intel so I'm waiting to buy one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, shairene said:

I belive that AMD wants to attract as many new users because they think they have a good product. Also if the new RYZEN CPU's will be at least 80% as good as Intel's CPU's at the half of a price or at a 2/3 it's a lot. Now we need to wait for it to come out see the price and the benchmarks so we can decide if it wa worth it. Myself I think that AMD will give a good fight to Intel so I'm waiting to buy one.

i agree they are trying to gain as much market-share as possible probably to help improve their reputation, and help server people believe that amd will be around for a long time, server guys before spending money on hardware want to be shore that they gonna have service available for some time and upgrade options.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

acb.jpg

 

I for one agree with the pricing table if real. It makes more sense to me to sell at a lower price and gain more market share... yes they might make more money, but gaining a bigger foothold again and being known for decent CPUs can only be good you'd think right? I mean, look right now, a newb asks on this forum and pretty much most other forums what cpu tp have for a gaming rig, and most people will say an i5 quad core, mostly because it packs just enough punch for most games while still being "reasonable" cost. When AMD releases their CPUs and benchmarks come out, if the quad core even comes close to matching the i5s performance, the AMD will be the more reasonable buy for a lot of people because of the thread count being useful too in some instances for other tasks. So AMD should then start getting more market share and still be getting more profit than trying to sell at a higher price point.

It's not too low, it's just more reasonable than intel's pricing... and don't get me wrong, I love my intel CPUs, but if I can get a similar single core performance as an intel i7 for instance but get 4 more cores/8 threads extra too, and it's cheaper... then I'll be laughing.

Please quote my post, or put @paddy-stone if you want me to respond to you.

Spoiler
  • PCs:- 
  • Main PC build  https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/2K6Q7X
  • ASUS x53e  - i7 2670QM / Sony BD writer x8 / Win 10, Elemetary OS, Ubuntu/ Samsung 830 SSD
  • Lenovo G50 - 8Gb RAM - Samsung 860 Evo 250GB SSD - DVD writer
  •  
  • Displays:-
  • Philips 55 OLED 754 model
  • Panasonic 55" 4k TV
  • LG 29" Ultrawide
  • Philips 24" 1080p monitor as backup
  •  
  • Storage/NAS/Servers:-
  • ESXI/test build  https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/4wyR9G
  • Main Server https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/3Qftyk
  • Backup server - HP Proliant Gen 8 4 bay NAS running FreeNAS ZFS striped 3x3TiB WD reds
  • HP ProLiant G6 Server SE316M1 Twin Hex Core Intel Xeon E5645 2.40GHz 48GB RAM
  •  
  • Gaming/Tablets etc:-
  • Xbox One S 500GB + 2TB HDD
  • PS4
  • Nvidia Shield TV
  • Xiaomi/Pocafone F2 pro 8GB/256GB
  • Xiaomi Redmi Note 4

 

  • Unused Hardware currently :-
  • 4670K MSI mobo 16GB ram
  • i7 6700K  b250 mobo
  • Zotac GTX 1060 6GB Amp! edition
  • Zotac GTX 1050 mini

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 4:35 PM, PCGuy_5960 said:

But if it can compete, I see no reason why they would not ask $700 for it. After all, Ryzen boards are cheaper.

because amd need to build a customer base. If you have two cpus that are the same performance and cost but you're already have the mother for one why switch?

 

Having lower prices and overclocking across their whole range gives everyone from budget to gamers to workstations a reason to change the hardware.

 

I'm sure once the market share starts shifting and levels out we will see intel and amd match on prices.

                     ¸„»°'´¸„»°'´ Vorticalbox `'°«„¸`'°«„¸
`'°«„¸¸„»°'´¸„»°'´`'°«„¸Scientia Potentia est  ¸„»°'´`'°«„¸`'°«„¸¸„»°'´

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, vorticalbox said:

because amd need to build a customer base. If you have two cpus that are the same performance and cost but you're already have the mother for one why switch?

 

Having lower prices and overclocking across their whole range gives everyone from budget to gamers to workstations a reason to change the hardware.

 

I'm sure once the market share starts shifting and levels out we will see intel and amd match on prices.

$700 vs. $1000 should be more than enough of a difference for people to choose Zen. Zen shouldn't be targeting users who already have an X99 board but rather everyone else. And again, don't forget that AMD themselves have said they don't want to be known as the cheaper option, and they have always been priced competitively when they offer competitive performance.

 

And that's not even considering the fact that a slightly cheaper alternative would likely not illicit a response from Intel, whereas 50% cheaper would (thereby negating that 50% cheaper price advantage).

PSU Tier List | CoC

Gaming Build | FreeNAS Server

Spoiler

i5-4690k || Seidon 240m || GTX780 ACX || MSI Z97s SLI Plus || 8GB 2400mhz || 250GB 840 Evo || 1TB WD Blue || H440 (Black/Blue) || Windows 10 Pro || Dell P2414H & BenQ XL2411Z || Ducky Shine Mini || Logitech G502 Proteus Core

Spoiler

FreeNAS 9.3 - Stable || Xeon E3 1230v2 || Supermicro X9SCM-F || 32GB Crucial ECC DDR3 || 3x4TB WD Red (JBOD) || SYBA SI-PEX40064 sata controller || Corsair CX500m || NZXT Source 210.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vorticalbox said:

because amd need to build a customer base. If you have two cpus that are the same performance and cost but you're already have the mother for one why switch?

If you have lower than Skylake then you'll need to buy a new motherboard anyway.

Intel i7 5820K (4.5 GHz) | MSI X99A MPower | 32 GB Kingston HyperX Fury 2666MHz | Asus RoG STRIX GTX 1080ti OC | Samsung 951 m.2 nVME 512GB | Crucial MX200 1000GB | Western Digital Caviar Black 2000GB | Noctua NH-D15 | Fractal Define R5 | Seasonic 860 Platinum | Logitech G910 | Sennheiser 599 | Blue Yeti | Logitech G502

 

Nikon D500 | Nikon 300mm f/4 PF  | Nikon 200-500 f/5.6 | Nikon 50mm f/1.8 | Tamron 70-210 f/4 VCII | Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 | Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 | Tamron 90mm F2.8 SP Di VC USD Macro | Neewer 750II

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Fetzie said:

If you have lower than Skylake then you'll need to buy a new motherboard anyway.

Yep, pretty much every time Intel brings out a new CPU architecture that means new chipsets/scokets/motherboards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

$700 vs. $1000 should be more than enough of a difference for people to choose Zen. Zen shouldn't be targeting users who already have an X99 board but rather everyone else. And again, don't forget that AMD themselves have said they don't want to be known as the cheaper option, and they have always been priced competitively when they offer competitive performance.

 

And that's not even considering the fact that a slightly cheaper alternative would likely not illicit a response from Intel, whereas 50% cheaper would (thereby negating that 50% cheaper price advantage).

Idk if 700 vs 1000 would be enough. You have to realize that people would rather just go intel if the price difference isn't significant. I mean you know you're going to get good performance with Intel where as if you go with Ryzen you are kind of taking a risk. More people will be willing to take that risk if the price difference more. Also you have to take into account the 6 core 6800k which is reasonably priced that some might consider over a Ryzen 8 core. There is a difference between being known as the cheaper option and the value option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what the performance will be, but how would it be a risk if there are reviews out for RyZen? That makes no sense. A risk that your performance will randomly cut in half some day or something?

11 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Idk if 700 vs 1000 would be enough. You have to realize that people would rather just go intel if the price difference isn't significant. I mean you know you're going to get good performance with Intel where as if you go with Ryzen you are kind of taking a risk. More people will be willing to take that risk if the price difference more. Also you have to take into account the 6 core 6800k which is reasonably priced that some might consider over a Ryzen 8 core. There is a difference between being known as the cheaper option and the value option. 

 

CPU i7 6700 Cooling Cryorig H7 Motherboard MSI H110i Pro AC RAM Kingston HyperX Fury 16GB DDR4 2133 GPU Pulse RX 5700 XT Case Fractal Design Define Mini C Storage Trascend SSD370S 256GB + WD Black 320GB + Sandisk Ultra II 480GB + WD Blue 1TB PSU EVGA GS 550 Display Nixeus Vue24B FreeSync 144 Hz Monitor (VESA mounted) Keyboard Aorus K3 Mechanical Keyboard Mouse Logitech G402 OS Windows 10 Home 64 bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

A risk that your performance will randomly cut in half some day or something?

 

I wonder if AMD FinewineTM works on processors?

SFF-ish:  Ryzen 5 1600X, Asrock AB350M Pro4, 16GB Corsair LPX 3200, Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro -75mV, 512gb Plextor Nvme m.2, 512gb Sandisk SATA m.2, Cryorig H7, stuffed into an Inwin 301 with rgb front panel mod.  LG27UD58.

 

Aging Workhorse:  Phenom II X6 1090T Black (4GHz #Yolo), 16GB Corsair XMS 1333, RX 470 Red Devil 4gb (Sold for $330 to Cryptominers), HD6850 1gb, Hilariously overkill Asus Crosshair V, 240gb Sandisk SSD Plus, 4TB's worth of mechanical drives, and a bunch of water/glycol.  Coming soon:  Bykski CPU block, whatever cheap Polaris 10 GPU I can get once miners start unloading them.

 

MintyFreshMedia:  Thinkserver TS130 with i3-3220, 4gb ecc ram, 120GB Toshiba/OCZ SSD booting Linux Mint XFCE, 2TB Hitachi Ultrastar.  In Progress:  3D printed drive mounts, 4 2TB ultrastars in RAID 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

I don't know what the performance will be, but how would it be a risk if there are reviews out for RyZen? That makes no sense. A risk that your performance will randomly cut in half some day or something?

 

its about trust. many people don't trust amd just because they have had bad experiences so it would make them wary to go with a brand that hasn't been competitive for along time. if you want to consider your product after being not competitive for so long and having that bad reputation you need to give the community a reason to switch. its not like amd hasn't priced their cpus lower than intel like this and having about the same performance in most tasks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

its about trust. many people don't trust amd just because they have had bad experiences so it would make them wary to go with a brand that hasn't been competitive for along time. if you want to consider your product after being not competitive for so long and having that bad reputation you need to give the community a reason to switch. its not like amd hasn't priced their cpus lower than intel like this and having about the same performance in most tasks. 

You are changing what you said.

26 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Idk if 700 vs 1000 would be enough. You have to realize that people would rather just go intel if the price difference isn't significant. I mean you know you're going to get good performance with Intel where as if you go with Ryzen you are kind of taking a risk. More people will be willing to take that risk if the price difference more. Also you have to take into account the 6 core 6800k which is reasonably priced that some might consider over a Ryzen 8 core. There is a difference between being known as the cheaper option and the value option. 

People not buying RyZen because of lack of trust stemming from their previous products is not the same as RyZen being an actual risk when benchmarks are already out. Maybe I'm thinking about this too much and your 2nd comment is what you really meant to say?

CPU i7 6700 Cooling Cryorig H7 Motherboard MSI H110i Pro AC RAM Kingston HyperX Fury 16GB DDR4 2133 GPU Pulse RX 5700 XT Case Fractal Design Define Mini C Storage Trascend SSD370S 256GB + WD Black 320GB + Sandisk Ultra II 480GB + WD Blue 1TB PSU EVGA GS 550 Display Nixeus Vue24B FreeSync 144 Hz Monitor (VESA mounted) Keyboard Aorus K3 Mechanical Keyboard Mouse Logitech G402 OS Windows 10 Home 64 bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

You are changing what you said.

People not buying RyZen because of lack of trust stemming from their previous products is not the same as RyZen being an actual risk when benchmarks are already out. Maybe I'm thinking about this too much and your 2nd comment is what you really meant to say?

I mean there are more to things than just benchmarks. Like if there are issues that aren't related to performance and what not. Knowing a product performs well doesn't mean that there aren't issues with it so i wouldn't say there isn't risk because you know what the benchmarks say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brooksie359 said:

its about trust. many people don't trust amd just because they have had bad experiences so it would make them wary to go with a brand that hasn't been competitive for along time.

people don't have bad experiences with AMD, their CPUs were solid and reliable.

on the 2nd point you are right, they have not been competitive on performance for a long time and so to layman they do not have the brand recognition of Intel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Humbug said:

people don't have bad experiences with AMD, their CPUs and movie are solid and reliable.

on the 2nd point you are right, they have been competitive on performance for a long time and so to layman they do not have the brand recognition of Intel.

people have had bad experiences with amd cpus. not everyone but yeah people have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brooksie359 said:

people have had bad experiences with amd cpus. not everyone but yeah people have. 

um of course people have had bad experiences. There are so many out there... Intel customer's too have had bad experiences.

 

there are millions of CPUs out there it's statistically guaranteed that people have had bad experiences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Humbug said:

um of course people have had bad experiences. There are so many out there... Intel customer's too have had bad experiences.

 

there are millions of CPUs out there it's statistically guaranteed that people have had bad experiences.

yeah but its more than that. i think the most notorious problem is with all the uninformed people who use the fx series cpus thinking the performance will be higher then what they actually ended up getting and the fact that so many people about a 970 motherboard thinking that it would be good at overclocking a fx 8xxx series cpu when it really isnt designed for that type of wattage. there are even all the people who have been burned by getting a A series apu not realizing they are not worth it compared to intel counterparts. now even if they try and inform themselves on the knew lineup of cpus form amd by looking at benchmarks alot of them will still be hesitiant to go with amd if the price is less. they want to give a good incentive to give amd a try or another try. im not hating on amd as i am super excited for ryzen and will likely be upgrading to it soon after launch but i do think amd needs to give people a pretty good incentive to get marketshare back.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

With recent hardware problems that hit in the last few years, I believe Ryzen will be under the microscope and checked in its every nook and cranny. Performance wise I have a feeling it will deliver, the only thing I want to make sure is that there are no hardware bugs and those kind of stuff, so If I make the move I will probably go for the second run in 1-2 months. 

//Case: Phanteks 400 TGE //Mobo: Asus x470-F Strix //CPU: R5 2600X //CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i v2 //RAM: G-Skill RGB 3200mhz //HDD: WD Caviar Black 1tb //SSD: Samsung 970 Evo 250Gb //GPU: GTX 1050 Ti //PSU: Seasonic MII EVO m2 520W

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unknowingly buying a low or under performing CPU then finding out that is what it is isn't a problem or issue with the AMD CPU, it's performing exactly how it should be just less than the buyer wanted it to.

 

We need to separate performance of CPUs and issues/problems, they are different things. One implies bad design or architecture and the other implies bad reliability, manufacturing or quality control. AMD CPUs don't have an abnormally high failure rate.

 

They did however have low performance which over time lead to people saying AMD CPUs have 'issues'. The problem with this is that it hurts AMD's brand image and sets a bad narrative for any future products unnecessarily. We are well within our rights to question performance as that has been the main complaint, we shouldn't be questioning reliability as there is no evidence of this ever being a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12.2.2017 at 6:30 PM, PCGuy_5960 said:

Me too. But $500 for a 6900K equivalent is too low....

You gotta remember that Intel has had the high-end industry completely for themselves, so they've been able to raise up the prices all they want without losing too many sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×