Jump to content

Ryzen 3 & 5 launch rumor

Devin92
By Devin92
in Tech News
 Share
Posted
Quote

It seems that enthusiasts looking for cheaper and better price/performance options for budget gaming and work machines will have to wait a bit for Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 which will reportedly launch in the second quarter and second half of 2017 respectively. Two six core Ryzen 5 processors will launch somewhere between April and June with the Ryzen 3 quad cores (along with mobile and "Raven Ridge" APU parts) following in the summer to end-of-year timeframe hopefully hitting that back-to-school and holiday shopping launch windows respectively.

God.... more waiting.

Ryzen 5 in april - june

Ryzen 3 after summer

Mobile "Raven ridge" towards the end of year.

 

Why AMD? WHY?! It takes AMD a year to launch one generation of product, just sad. And they launch the high end first. i3,i5 and i7 7700 is the most popular intel product, not the broadwell line up imo. this launch strategy doesnt make much sense to me since a lot of ppl want more affordable products.

Performance wise, we learn from yesterday paper launch, that 8c/16t ryzen is a good buy for multithreaded work load. Now I hope ryzen 3 & 5 can deliver at least on par single core/ gaming performance.

 

Source: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-Launching-Ryzen-5-Six-Core-Processors-Soon-Q2-2017

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

It's not a rumour, it was shown on non-public AMD slides.

On why they are launching them later, the only logical explanation I can find is that the yields are good and they were able to produce fully functional Ryzen 7 chips. Ryzen 3 might be based on a different die, since more than half of the chip would be disabled.

From salty to bath salty in 2.9 seconds

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Not a rumor, homie.

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
Posted
1 minute ago, fastcar123 said:

I personally think they did it on purpose. Aiming for people like me who are impatient and are willing to upgrade to the ryzen 7 series

yeah I'm thinking the same thing because the higher clocked six cores might eat into the r7 1700 sales. if the 6 cores were out i would get them without question but now that i have to wait for them to come out i'm thinking i might end up getting the r7 1700 if its possible to overclock it to similar frequencies as the r7 1700x. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
15 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

 

im just wondering what they mean with "Ryzen 3: 2H" right now...

I spent $2500 on building my PC and all i do with it is play no games atm & watch anime at 1080p(finally) watch YT and write essays...  nothing, it just sits there collecting dust...

Builds:

The Toaster Project! Northern Bee!

 

The original LAN PC build log! (Old, dead and replaced by The Toaster Project & 5.0)

Spoiler

"Here is some advice that might have gotten lost somewhere along the way in your life. 

 

#1. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

#2. It's best to keep your mouth shut; and appear to be stupid, rather than open it and remove all doubt.

#3. There is nothing "wrong" with being wrong. Learning from a mistake can be more valuable than not making one in the first place.

 

Follow these simple rules in life, and I promise you, things magically get easier. " - MageTank 31-10-2016

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

im just wondering what they mean with "Ryzen 3: 2H" right now...

I believe it means it'll be released in the second half of the year, which means sometime past the middle of June.

Why is the God of Hyperdeath SO...DARN...CUTE!?

 

Also, if anyone has their mind corrupted by an anthropomorphic black latex bat, please let me know. I would like to join you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 hour ago, Devin92 said:

God.... more waiting.

Ryzen 5 in april - june

Ryzen 3 after summer

Mobile "Raven ridge" towards the end of year.

 

Why AMD? WHY?! It takes AMD a year to launch one generation of product, just sad. And they launch the high end first. i3,i5 and i7 7700 is the most popular intel product, not the broadwell line up imo. this launch strategy doesnt make much sense to me since a lot of ppl want more affordable products.

Performance wise, we learn from yesterday paper launch, that 8c/16t ryzen is a good buy for multithreaded work load. Now I hope ryzen 3 & 5 can deliver at least on par single core/ gaming performance.

 

Source: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-Launching-Ryzen-5-Six-Core-Processors-Soon-Q2-2017

 

 

1 hour ago, nerdslayer1 said:

its not easy developing a cpu, they also have to test everything to make sure everything works. no one wants a incident like Samsung galaxy note 7 again. 

 

It doesn't take them a year to launch. Launch strategy does make sense for them, from business stand point.
And yeah, not a rumor, it's confirmed.

| Ryzen 7 7800X3D | AM5 B650 Aorus Elite AX | G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5 32GB 6000MHz C30 | Sapphire PULSE Radeon RX 7900 XTX | Samsung 990 PRO 1TB with heatsink | Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360 | Seasonic Focus GX-850 | Lian Li Lanccool III | Mousepad: Skypad 3.0 XL / Zowie GTF-X | Mouse: Zowie S1-C | Keyboard: Ducky One 3 TKL (Cherry MX-Speed-Silver) | Beyerdynamic MMX 300 (2nd Gen) | Acer XV272U | OS: Windows 11 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

My FX 6300 is dying over here with Black Desert.. thanks AMD!

"Ryzen is doing really well in 1440p and 4K gaming when the applications are more graphics bound" - Dr. Lisa Su, 2017

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 hour ago, nerdslayer1 said:

its not easy developing a cpu, they also have to test everything to make sure everything works. no one wants a incident like Samsung galaxy note 7 again. 

I mean, especially at first 5 and 3 are going to be 7 chips that didn't pass binning so it won't require that much work.

My Build:

Spoiler

CPU: i7 4770k GPU: GTX 780 Direct CUII Motherboard: Asus Maximus VI Hero SSD: 840 EVO 250GB HDD: 2xSeagate 2 TB PSU: EVGA Supernova G2 650W

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
5 minutes ago, MakeAMDGreatAgain said:

My FX 6300 is dying over here with Black Desert.. thanks AMD!

Does that game perform well on i5s or i7s?

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
Posted
2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Does that game perform well on i5s or i7s?

Well, technically it utilizes multiple cores bigly. i7's would be ideal for it, but only when you're in towns. I still get max fps outside of town, but if I go anywhere crowded my cpu usage goes to 99%, and the lag starts to kick in.

 

R7 would prob be the best, but no way on God's green earth I'm paying > 329$ for a damn cpu. I want the R5 6 core one :( 

"Ryzen is doing really well in 1440p and 4K gaming when the applications are more graphics bound" - Dr. Lisa Su, 2017

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
8 minutes ago, MakeAMDGreatAgain said:

R7 would prob be the best, but no way on God's green earth I'm paying > 329$ for a damn cpu. I want the R5 6 core one :( 

The R7 (Let's not continue this trend of calling it by it's full name) line-up is such a great deal already.

But yeah the R5 1600X is what i'm most interested in as well.
For the price of an i5, you basically get a 5820k in the mainstream line-up.

"If you ain't first, you're last"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

A benchmark with the R7 1700X (Turbo disabled, so only stuck @ 3.4/3.5Ghz and no OC'ing) that popped up

A $1,000 Hyperthreaded Octo-core, the 5960X, against the $400 Hyperthreaded Octo-core, the 1700X.


Take it for what you will, i've had enough trust earned in Userbenchmark where i feel more safe that Ryzen will be a success based on the similar performance and competitive pricing planned for these chips' release.

"If you ain't first, you're last"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
23 minutes ago, Centurius said:

I mean, especially at first 5 and 3 are going to be 7 chips that didn't pass binning so it won't require that much work.

Based on this article, the R5s are basically going to be R7s with a core and corresponding L2 cache disabled from each of the Core Complexes.  This might be a result of binning or defects in manufacturing.  I would imagine that the R3s will consist of the same chip, just with the removal of one of the Core Complexes.

 

https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-Launching-Ryzen-5-Six-Core-Processors-Soon-Q2-2017

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, Memories4K said:

A benchmark with the R7 1700X (Turbo disabled, so only stuck @ 3.4/3.5Ghz and no OC'ing) that popped up

A $1,000 Hyperthreaded Octo-core, the 5960X, against the $400 Hyperthreaded Octo-core, the 1700X.


Take it for what you will, i've had enough trust earned in Userbenchmark where i feel more safe that Ryzen will be a success based on the similar performance and competitive pricing planned for these chips' release.

I think AMD's main sellers are going to be those 6-core and 4-core CPUs if they perform well. Not saying the 1700+ won't sell well, but y'know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Regular people wouldn't need 8 cores.... hell most don't even need 6 cores yet..... hell  alot of them still isn't even really working with 4 cores.... Maybe the extreme fans that can actually use 8 cores would buy Amd but currently Nope most people currently would still buy intel cheaper 4 cores and faster :/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, Kloaked said:

I think AMD's main sellers are going to be those 6-core and 4-core CPUs if they perform well. Not saying the 1700+ won't sell well, but y'know.

Idk man, there's a lot of incentive to jump on an 8-core (8/16) with the 1700/1700X i see a lot of people getting an 8-core, especially Intel owners who wanted an 8 core but didn't want to shill a cool grand out as well as AMD FX 8-core owners who are looking to step out of AM3+ and trying to maintain having an 8-core for a reasonable price.
The 6-cores (6/12) will absolutely sell and sell more than the 8-cores, it's much too close to the current pricing of Intel's unlocked i5s for consumers to just shove off.
The 4-cores will sell well enough for sure but the pricing on those chips are much less aggressive with the 1400X (4/8) sitting at $200 and the 1200X (4/4) sitting at $150.
I see most people shilling out the extra $20-$60 from the 1400X to jump on a 1600X but i think the 1400X will probably be the least compelling option.
Why pay for a hyperthreaded 4-core for $200 when i can save myself $50 and get the same 4-core without the extra threads?
Why not just pay a little extra and get 6 real cores that are hyperthreaded if i need more cores?

"If you ain't first, you're last"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, rawrdaysgoby said:

Regular people wouldn't need 8 cores.... hell most don't even need 6 cores yet..... hell  alot of them still isn't even really working with 4 cores.... Maybe the extreme fans that can actually use 8 cores would buy Amd but currently Nope most people currently would still buy intel cheaper 4 cores and faster :/ 

The only real compelling option for regular people right now to choose Intel over AMD is the G4560 (hyper-threaded dualcore) That's it.
AMD's R3 1100 would be a quadcore about as fast as an intel i5 for the price of an i3.
Intel's G4560 is an i3 for the price of a Pentium chip.

"If you ain't first, you're last"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, Memories4K said:

Idk man, there's a lot of incentive to jump on an 8-core (8/16) with the 1700/1700X i see a lot of people getting an 8-core, especially Intel owners who wanted an 8 core but didn't want to shill a cool grand out as well as AMD FX 8-core owners who are looking to step out of AM3+ and trying to maintain having an 8-core for a reasonable price.
The 6-cores (6/12) will absolutely sell and sell more than the 8-cores, it's much too close to the current pricing of Intel's unlocked i5s for consumers to just shove off.
The 4-cores will sell well enough for sure but the pricing on those chips are much less aggressive with the 1400X (4/8) sitting at $200 and the 1200X (4/4) sitting at $150.
I see most people shilling out the extra $20-$60 from the 1400X to jump on a 1600X but i think the 1400X will probably be the least compelling option.
Why pay for a hyperthreaded 4-core for $200 when i can save myself $50 and get the same 4-core without the extra threads?
Why not just pay a little extra and get 6 real cores that are hyperthreaded if i need more cores?

True. I can't say I know the market well enough, but I'm just assuming there would be more people on the 4-core and 6-core train than the 8-core ones if they can get Intel-like performance for less - just if they perform.

 

I know I'll be getting the 1700X myself if it stacks up well at 4k, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

I know I'll be getting the 1700X myself if it stacks up well at 4k, though.

The AMD Ryzen CPUs weren't coming with integrated graphics last i checked so you'd still need a GPU to run your desktop @4K

"If you ain't first, you're last"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
11 minutes ago, rawrdaysgoby said:

Regular people wouldn't need 8 cores.... hell most don't even need 6 cores yet..... hell  alot of them still isn't even really working with 4 cores.... Maybe the extreme fans that can actually use 8 cores would buy Amd but currently Nope most people currently would still buy intel cheaper 4 cores and faster :/ 

Quite the observation there, are you saying the average person doesn't need to buy a high end CPU? Shocking. Just teasing you, but on a serious note eventually more and more programs will be optimized for more cores. 

 

So is AMD going with R3,R5,R7 to directly compete with i3,i5,i7? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 hours ago, Devin92 said:

God.... more waiting.

Ryzen 5 in april - june

Ryzen 3 after summer

Mobile "Raven ridge" towards the end of year.

 

Why AMD? WHY?! It takes AMD a year to launch one generation of product, just sad. And they launch the high end first. i3,i5 and i7 7700 is the most popular intel product, not the broadwell line up imo. this launch strategy doesnt make much sense to me since a lot of ppl want more affordable products.

Performance wise, we learn from yesterday paper launch, that 8c/16t ryzen is a good buy for multithreaded work load. Now I hope ryzen 3 & 5 can deliver at least on par single core/ gaming performance.

 

Source: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-Launching-Ryzen-5-Six-Core-Processors-Soon-Q2-2017

 

 Still Waiting on something more powerful then the RX 480.  It seems they make decent products at a good price points but mess launch up and give competitors a chance to react too much 

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
 Share
Go to topic listing Tech News

×