BitsAndChips: entry-level Threadripper 16c/32t to come at the nice low price of $849

[captain cactus]

Only source I have is BitsAndChips' Twitter:

 

 

 

He adds in one of the comments:

 

Quote

According to my sources, a ThreadRipper 16C/32T (Dies+Package+Testing) cost AMD about 110-120$. 849$-110/120$ = 739/729$ Not bad.

That's pretty damn low if you ask me. Then again, it is multiple smaller dies making up the CPU unlike Intel who goes for one massive chip. And with yields of the 8-core Ryzen CPU apparently at 80% for all 8-core SKUs (meaning 6- and 4-core CPUs are perfectly functioning 8-core dies with functioning cores cut off) this allows AMD to be very, very aggressive with pricing.

 

All good stuff. But then again, one massive bastard of a rumour. Nothing concrete at all.

[marldorthegreat]

doubt it, the 16 core variant must be atleast £1000

[Bananasplit_00]

im thinking we may have 16c for just under $1k but motherboards starting at $400...

[PeachyUwUSenpai]

yeah that price seems about right any higher and intel would probably sell more of the i9

[ashypanda]

while worth taking with a mountain of salt, if true, and how much cheaper it is than xeons, it could be a fantastic option for any enterprise who needs 100's of monster workstations.

[WereCat]

R7 1700 8/16 $319

So I would expect the Threadripper 16/32 version of the R7 1700 to cost x2 + something about $100-$150 extra which is not that much surprising really. (considering how AMD manufactures the Threadripper by basically taking multiple dies instead of new architecture/single big die like Intel).

 

However, the motherboards will be this time a lot more pricey.

 

So I find this rumor quite plausible.

[laminutederire]

8Intel keeps the performance edge with their 18 core but they overpriced as usual, either because they gauge prices with the Intel tax or because they can't produce them cheaply enough, which can explain why amd price so low in comparison.

18 minutes ago, WereCat said:

R7 1700 8/16 $319

So I would expect the Threadripper 16/32 version of the R7 1700 to cost x2 + something about $100-$150 extra which is not that much surprising really. (considering how AMD manufactures the Threadripper by basically taking multiple dies instead of new architecture/single big die like Intel).

 

However, the motherboards will be this time a lot more pricey.

 

So I find this rumor quite plausible.

X299 won't be cheap either anyway!

We could very well have the choice between dual socket motherboard +RAM + 2× 16 cores/32 threads amd chip at the same cost as one X299+RAM + Intel 18 cores chip.

That probably won't fare well for Intel even if they keep the best chip of the market

[The Benjamins]

59 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

im thinking we may have 16c for just under $1k but motherboards starting at $400...

I would expect x399 MOBO to be priced around the same as x299 (x99) so $200-$500. and a month ago it was $1300+ for a 8c16t CPU with MOBO, now it is $1100+ for 16c32t for CPU and MOBO I think that is awesome.

[Taf the Ghost]

B&C has had pretty good quality rumors that have panned out recently, so this makes a lot of sense.

 

The much more interesting aspect is the weaved-in pricing that's being suggested. In other words, the top-speed 12c might be $899 or so.  Rather than a linear stack of Cores + Speeds.  Makes for some very interesting buying options.  If you need more speed than too many extra cores or if you need a lot of cores but the extra speed is worthless, you suddenly have options.

[rn8686]

If this is true, that could wreck any current Intel i7s/i9s for value. Would put Xeons in danger too, Intel may actually have to lower their prices for once. 

[Dackzy]

oh boy, this is great if it is true. This is so cheap and then their 10c (the CPU I want) is also going to be a "cheap" CPU. F yeah.

Plus this must be a wake-up call for Intel about their pricing.

[TOMPPIX]

RIP EU customers.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

It would be nice and all (how much would the 10-core and 12-core variants cost then?), but if the costs part is true, I'm really interesting in what it may mean for the server and enterprise market, where there's little room to slap a "gaming" sticker somewhere and charge higher prices...

[The Benjamins]

2 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

RIP EU customers.

What do you mean?

[WereCat]

15 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

What do you mean?

Tax, but that's normal. These announced prices are without tax and in EU it is usually 20% extra.

[DildorTheDecent]

The package is crap though. 4 dies under one IHS. 

 

Intel hasn't done dual die let alone quad die in years. Don't think Intel ever done quad die. 

 

AMD pls. 

[tom_w141]

2 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

I would expect x399 MOBO to be priced around the same as x299 (x99) so $200-$500. and a month ago it was $1300+ for a 8c16t CPU with MOBO, now it is $1100+ for 16c32t for CPU and MOBO I think that is awesome.

Agree motherboard pricing is irrelevant because it won't be more than X299 which is also expensive. If that pricing is true then Intel will need any of the following:

 

- Dumb blind loyalty

- Contracts tying business to Intel products (though I don't think they are allowed to do this anymore since being caught and taken to court)

- Severe price drops

- Massive performance gains (>50%)

[Sauron]

Just now, DildorTheDecent said:

The package is crap though. 4 dies under one IHS. 

 

Intel hasn't done dual die let alone quad die in years. Don't think Intel ever done quad die. 

 

AMD pls. 

Let's wait to see how well it works  if this price is correct and the performance isn't too gimped it seems to be extremely good value

[tom_w141]

1 minute ago, DildorTheDecent said:

The package is crap though. 4 dies under one IHS. 

 

Intel hasn't done dual die let alone quad die in years. Don't think Intel ever done quad die. 

 

AMD pls. 

CCX latency has a very small effect on performance so if enough performance is there then it will be very hard to justify paying double for the Intel. Price is key here.

[tom_w141]

24 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

It would be nice and all (how much would the 10-core and 12-core variants cost then?), but if the costs part is true, I'm really interesting in what it may mean for the server and enterprise market, where there's little room to slap a "gaming" sticker somewhere and charge higher prices...

That market would be what Epyc is for.

 

Threadripper is half an Epyc server cpu just like the 18 core i9 is a cut down Xeon.

[DildorTheDecent]

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Let's wait to see how well it works  if this price is correct and the performance isn't too gimped it seems to be extremely good value

 

2 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

CCX latency has a very small effect on performance so if enough performance is there then it will be very hard to justify paying double for the Intel. Price is key here.

Wonder how toasty the middle will get. Imagine mounting a cooler to find there's a hotspot in one corner. lol

[Coaxialgamer]

3 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

The package is crap though. 4 dies under one IHS. 

 

Intel hasn't done dual die let alone quad die in years. Don't think Intel ever done quad die. 

 

AMD pls. 

Threadripper will be dual die. I don't expect it to be that much of an issue though. Intel's implementations of dual die ( namely the pentium d and early c2q) used the FSB for inter chip communication. Bandwidth was significantly lower, and they had to share it with the rest of the system. I don't believe this is the case here. 

Previous attempts can almost be qualified as rush-jobs to get multi-core to the market asap. This was planned. 

[tom_w141]

2 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

 

Wonder how toasty the middle will get. Imagine mounting a cooler to find there's a hotspot in one corner. lol

Probably still a lot cooler than the unsoldered 18 core Intel lol...

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

That market would be what Epyc is for.

Yes...?
My point is that if the costs reported in this thread are correct, then AMD can set very competitive prices in the Server market, since Naples is based on the same architecture and manufacturing process.

 

3 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

 

Threadripper is half an Epyc server cpu just like the 18 core i9 is a cut down Xeon.

They are not: Xeons are in no way "combined i7s" the way the server parts are combined Ryzen dies.

[tom_w141]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Yes...?
My point is that if the costs reported in this thread are correct, then AMD can set very competitive prices in the Server market, since Naples is based on the same architecture and manufacturing process.

 

They are not: Xeons are in no way "combined i7s" the way the server parts are combined Ryzen dies.

I never said they were combined i7s... But the 18 core is based on the higher core count xeon