AMD trims pricing of the Ryzen 7 1700 and 1700X: 1700 for $319, 1700X for $349.

[Valentyn]

1 minute ago, TheRandomness said:

Can't wait to see what Vega's capable of though. Unlike everyone else I think that them taking their time is allowing them to fix some small issues they may have with drivers and such.

It'd make a lot more sense if only a single CCX was enabled, but eh.

I'm also excited for Vega still. Raja admitted before they're a few generations behind, thanks to old management going full spanners and considering consumer discrete graphics dead.

I still think most of Vega's delay is due to HBM2 production issues; but it was also mostly done just when Raja arrived back at AMD. So these delays could also be him and the team trying to get more performance out.

 

2 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

So it only has single channel memory? 

I'm pretty sure it's been said that the R3 would be the same dual CCX design as the R5/R7. A single CCX die would also only a support single channel of RAM. 

Oh that's an interesting question!

Since each CCX has an IMC. I would assume the APUs are designed to have an extra IMC somewhere, otherwise it would be single channel. 

 

Vega also uses Infinity Fabric, so it could be CCX + GPU linked via a new cache system.

We'll have to wait and see.

[TheRandomness]

1 minute ago, Valentyn said:

I'm also excited for Vega still. Raja admitted before they're a few generations behind, thanks to old management going full spanners and considering consumer discrete graphics dead.

I still think most of Vega's delay is due to HBM2 production issues; but it was also mostly done just when Raja arrived back at AMD. So these delays could also be him and the team trying to get more performance out.

-snips-

It's quite possible they're having issues with the interposer and the final assembly of the package, though I wouldn't be surprised if it was literally just driver tuning

[Valentyn]

Just now, TheRandomness said:

It's quite possible they're having issues with the interposer and the final assembly of the package, though I wouldn't be surprised if it was literally just driver tuning

 

That would be nice if it's the only issue.

 

Raja did mention in the AMA that Vega is very challenging since it's such a radically difference design compared to Polaris.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

I thought that was the price already.

[NinerL]

The 1700 was going for $280 2 weeks ago, you had to use a coupon on eBay though.

[Jito463]

5 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I thought that was the price already.

 

3 minutes ago, NinerL said:

The 1700 was going for $280 2 weeks ago, you had to use a coupon on eBay though.

I believe the point is that AMD's MSRP is reduced, not that individual retailers have reduced the price to that level.

[cj09beira]

20 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Wait a sec, that's a BGA package for it? That's adorably small, I want one for a keychain.

i have a pentium 3 in a key chain :-) 

silicon dies are beautiful 

[tom_w141]

18 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Hopefully AMD can drop the 1800X to something like $399 or $429.

But it's nice to see the price drops on the 1700/X, even if the 1700's price drop is fairly minimal.

People shouldn't much care what is stamped on the IHS, under the hood 1700 = 1700X = 1800X.

 

My friend and I preordered at the same time however when hearing they were all unlocked I had a hunch and dropped to a 1700 while he kept his 1800X for bragging rights and because obviously it'd be better. I didn't change back (even if he was right it was amazon so i'd just return it and get the 1800X). So fast forward to launch, I have my 1700 installed and in use because it came with the RGB spire, meanwhile he is sat there with an 1800X he can't use while waiting for his AM4 kraken bracket. 4 weeks later both our AM4 brackets arrive so we install them, I am at 4GHz (haven't tried to go further because I know my chances), he is at 4.025GHz (it will not go higher voltage climbs exponentially) and £160 worse off. Guess who is bragging and who is salty AF  

[JoostinOnline]

11 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

People shouldn't much care what is stamped on the IHS, under the hood 1700 = 1700X = 1800X.

No they aren't.  Ryzen isn't a very good overclocker. You'll have to get lucky to push a 1700 to the same level as an 1800X. 

[Jito463]

28 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

i have a pentium 3 in a key chain :-) 

silicon dies are beautiful 

I have a 72 pin SIMM on my keychain.  I used to have a 30 pin SIMM (the 640KB stick from my old AMD 486 DX/2 66MHz), but the hole it was hanging from broke away.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

2 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

No they aren't.  Ryzen isn't a very good overclocker.

That applies to all of them.

2 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

 

You'll have to get lucky to push a 1700 to the same level as an 1800X. 

Citation needed.

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

No they aren't.  Ryzen isn't a very good overclocker. You'll have to get lucky to push a 1700 to the same level as an 1800X. 

That's not true at all. Basically all Ryzen chips will hit somewhere between 3.9-4.1ghz based on posts/reviews and the specific model doesn't seem to have much of an impact.

[cj09beira]

Just now, Jito463 said:

I have a 72 pin SIMM on my keychain.  I used to have a 30 pin SIMM (the 640KB stick from my old AMD 486 DX/2 66MHz), but the hole it was hanging from broke away.

i have a collection of delided dies from all my previous pcs: a 775 p4 a p3, and a 478 p4,

next will be my 3570k, (but that one only in a few years)

[Sakkura]

This is bad news. I guess it's good for the people who get a cheaper CPU, but this means Intel is still crushing AMD despite AMD offering so much better value for money. The lower price means AMD's profit margin gets thinner, and it was already WAY thinner than Intel's.

 

That means AMD's ability to compete in the coming years is being harmed.

[cj09beira]

16 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

That's not true at all. Basically all Ryzen chips will hit somewhere between 3.9-4.1ghz.

from the data silicon lottery had on their site (not  there anymore) the 1700x had about 20%~ better change of reaching 4ghz, or the same at lower voltage, same goes for the 1800x, let me try find the graph i did

EDIT: I WAS WRONG the 1800x has a better chance the 1700x is not much better than the 1700

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JmupyJ7NaVUevjYxUY-KNllKn6HwP4cG2XCuowrnTzg/pubchart?oid=2002362242&format=interactive

[Jito463]

5 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

No they aren't.  Ryzen isn't a very good overclocker. You'll have to get lucky to push a 1700 to the same level as an 1800X. 

The 1700, 1700x and 1800x are identical, save for base clock speeds, boost speeds and XFR support.  The advantage to the 1800x or 1700x, is not needing to manually overclock your CPU.

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

This is bad news. I guess it's good for the people who get a cheaper CPU, but this means Intel is still crushing AMD despite AMD offering so much better value for money. The lower price means AMD's profit margin gets thinner, and it was already WAY thinner than Intel's.

 

That means AMD's ability to compete in the coming years is being harmed.

It could also be that they're trying to boost 1700x/1800x sales since there isn't any reason to spend extra for them compared to a 1700. That would just raise the question as to why they dropped the price of the 1700 as well. And that could be that it was already selling at that price so lowering the MSRP makes it sound/look better since MSRPs are often quoted or maybe it was done to hide the fact that AMD has realized the 1700x/1800x is stupid. Although I'm sure it's not selling as well as AMD would like since Intel has a lot of marketing power/name recognition.

 

[Orangeator]

2 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

This is bad news. I guess it's good for the people who get a cheaper CPU, but this means Intel is still crushing AMD despite AMD offering so much better value for money. The lower price means AMD's profit margin gets thinner, and it was already WAY thinner than Intel's.

 

That means AMD's ability to compete in the coming years is being harmed.

I don't know, I wouldn't speculate until exactly one year after all of Ryzen has been available for purchase. R3, APU's... Etc.

[Sakkura]

Just now, Orangeator said:

I don't know, I wouldn't speculate until exactly one year after all of Ryzen has been available for purchase. R3, APU's... Etc.

If they were selling well, there wouldn't be a reason for price cuts across the R7 family. Certainly not this soon after launch.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

11 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

This is bad news. I guess it's good for the people who get a cheaper CPU, but this means Intel is still crushing AMD despite AMD offering so much better value for money.

I think that's a premature conclusion. It hasn't been that long since launch, and AMD market share did increase.

I'm more inclined to think this is just the hype tax being lifted.

[Sakkura]

Just now, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I think that's a premature conclusion. It hasn't been that long since launch, and AMD market share did increase.

I'm more inclined to think this is just the hype tax being lifted.

Well, the FX-8370 is still outselling the 1700X and 1800X.

[potoooooooo]

Just now, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I think that's a premature conclusion. It hasn't been that long since launch, and AMD market share did increase.

I'm more inclined to think this is just the hype tax being lifted.

There are plenty of reasons for a price cut.

 

First wave of sales dried up, it's down from release hype to standard stuff. They just want to drum up sales

They refined the production a bit. Maybe they're getting more for cheaper, might as well pass on some savings

They don't need the extra margin, now that they've had a ton of sales they cut back the price to keep them moving.

[cj09beira]

djdwosk97

 

here is the data:

you were right 1700 to 1700x the diference is pretty small

the 1700x on average has 4% better chance of being stable, while using 16mv less voltage

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JmupyJ7NaVUevjYxUY-KNllKn6HwP4cG2XCuowrnTzg/pubchart?oid=2002362242&format=interactive

[Dash Lambda]

1 minute ago, Sakkura said:

If they were selling well, there wouldn't be a reason for price cuts across the R7 family. Certainly not this soon after launch.

Could also be that, with Intel's upcoming releases, they predicted that cutting prices by about ~7% overall would prove profitable by volume of sales, especially by winning over people who like to just buy the hot new thing that they might lose to Intel if they wait. I mean, look at Intel's price cut on the 8-core -This is just another step in their back-and-forth now that they're competing again.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 minute ago, Sakkura said:

Well, the FX-8370 is still outselling the 1700X and 1800X.

At a completely different price point.

 

In any case, my point is that Ryzen hasn't been out long enough for AMD to panic, nor celebrate, whatever the current figures. Ryzen may be better value for your money than Intel for new buyers, but people who bought any of the most recent Intel architectures has a reason to run and sell their PCs and buy Ryzen. 

In other words, I don't think that a price change this early can be based on sales, whether high or low.