AMD Ryzen Full Lineup Prices, Specs & Clock Speeds Leaked

[Techstorm970]

30 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

I didn't say up to

I said MORE than 8 threads!

Yeah that's true. 

[Guiltyxz]

1 hour ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

So Ryzen is probably just right around the corner, the full lineup pricing has been leaked

 

Original arcticle:

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-full-lineup-pricing-clock-speeds-leaked/

 

 

 

So, how does that looks to you... Ryzen will be competitve or nahh?

4 cores 4 threads 3.8ghz+ for 149$...this should appeal to gamers i think

 

If I was going to buy though (and I might because am planning to upgrade) I would go for the 4 cores 8 threads @ 3.9GHz for 200$ because that is great value

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 hour ago, Ethan Meskin said:

i thought it was 2/3 or 1/2 a month. damm i might have to wait longer

Yeah, you're correct  

My bad

[Techstorm970]

52 minutes ago, Ethan Meskin said:

looking at that, would a ryzen 3 1200x and a overclocking board be better than a ryzen 5 1300 and amds alternative to h110?

Get the 1200x.  The additional speed would probably be more beneficial than the additional threads.

[Techstorm970]

My synopsis of AMD Ryzen X-skew processors.

i5-4690k < R3-1200X <= i5-6600k

R5-1400X = i7-4790k

i7-4960X < R5-1600X <= i7-5930k

R7-1700X >= i7-5960X

i7-5960X < R7-1800X <= i7-6900k

[LukaH]

it is good that people are talking about ryzen but these leaks are getting ridiculous. i think the lineup and prices were "leaked" like four times now 

[Techstorm970]

1 minute ago, LukaH said:

it is good that people are talking about ryzen but these leaks are getting ridiculous. i think the lineup and prices were "leaked" like four times now 

Sorry!  It's hard for us to contain our excitement!  

[Coaxialgamer]

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

If these prices are true, then we can consider Ryzen to be a fair bit below any Intel offering performance-wise. Ryzen probably has the best perf/$ but Intel will definitely have a decent performance lead according to these prices. AMD won't price them lower than they have to, so AMD pricing their top dog at half of what Intel's equivalent is... That's an indicator of it not being able to trade blows with it.

Except we have the canardpc leaks. Those can be considered fairly accurate. 

Thing is, amd usually prices their products similarly to equivalent competing products. You can see this in the gpu market and when they made cpus such as k7 and k8. That is because unless one company has a significant manufacturing advantage ( looking at hd 48** vs gtx 280/260), then  the costs of manufacturing and distribution are similar, meaning that even if company A can undercut competitor I, the latter can also cut prices. Prices usually reach an equilibrium because neither company can reasonably lower their margins past some point. 

 

These are the mechanisms at play in a dynamic market. It holds true in the gpu market, the memory market and even non tech markets. 

But due to the lack of competition in the modern cpu market, these dynamics haven't happened, meaning intel could charge whatever they wanted.

 

Case in point, the cost of a given SKU has increased on average by 10% in the last 5 years. They have effectively locked nearly all their SKU's ( even though 1st gen core i chips were multiplier locked, they could use Bclock. Since sandy bridge, this isn't the case anymore). 

Processors such as the 180$ 7350k and 1700$ 6950x are perfect examples of how complacent they got. 

For the last 10 years, intel has only offered quad cores on the mainstream, making more and more money as each node shrink decreases die size. 

 

You could make the argument that amd wouldn't undercut intel by much in a dynamic market. However, in a static market such as the  current cpu market, this doesn't necessarily apply. 

 

[LukaH]

1 minute ago, techstorm970 said:

Sorry!  It's hard for us to contain our excitement!  

im right there with you

just waiting on benchmarks to pick a motherboard form factor and finally start planning my build that is why these leaks are so annoying

[i_build_nanosuits]

People saying these prices seem to low: it's not that these prices are that low...500$ for a high end CPU is a normal price...1200$ for a high-end CPU is what does not make sense...intel messing with your heads guys...and that is 499$ USD MSRP...it will probably end up costing more like 549$ at launch on newegg...and 899$ here in canada or some shit like that...i mean, it's not ''that crazy low'' of a price IMHO...intel CPU are way way overpriced and have been for years...that's the take away here IMHO.

[jagdtigger]

Yup, intel did no improvement aside from the price bumps in the last 3 gen... Unless that useless DRM scheme counts as an improvement(in my standards its a huge setback).

[Techstorm970]

5 minutes ago, LukaH said:

im right there with you

just waiting on benchmarks to pick a motherboard form factor and finally start planning my build that is why these leaks are so annoying

An AIO cooler would probably be ideal.  Perfect balance between cost and cooling performance.  

[Simon771]

2 hours ago, AHaskin14 said:

Wonder how intel feels about the 3, 5, 7 naming scheme

lawsuit

[Doobeedoo]

If really so, prices are very competitive, specially flagship. As far as clock speeds, whole lineup is pretty much quite close across the different # of cores, which I would expect higher frequency on lower core count chips. But who knows, we'll see.

[Phate.exe]

Literally the only question in my mind at this point is do I want to go with the 1400X or the 1600X.

 

The 1400X sure sounds an awful lot like an i7-4000-I don't care the numbers after that with cool auto-overclocking and a nice low TDP.  This would realistically suit my needs extremely well.

 

The 1600X is more of "#Yolo, it's only $60 more".  And it would be a fitting upgrade from my Thuban.

[Guest Darth Revan]

Reasonable prices. Actually I have to say correct prices.

But what prices will the mobos have? Because remember Intel charges a high premium for their Intel brand on mobos.

[AHaskin14]

25 minutes ago, Simon771 said:

lawsuit

But nobody in the tech industry ever drags out giant lawsuits...

[TimeOmnivore]

As I'm just waiting on Ryzen before building my next PC, if I can get at least i5 66/7600k performance at equal to than Intel's cost, I'll likely go for Ryzen, such as the 1600X, (depending on the benchmarks released and how all of the CPUs in the $200-250(USD)~ish price range perform).

 

As for the prices, I can see why AMD would be undercutting Intel by such a large margin on the high-end, since if the performance is even remotely close to something like a 6900k, AMD will attract a lot of new/returning consumers. It would be nice for the CPU market if AMD is capable of bringing the market share closer to 50/50 with the AM4 platform for at least a few years so Intel can adjust (i.e. bring down) their prices and have some motivation to do something more with their CPUs than small, incremental upgrades. The CPU market has gotten boring, we need more mid/high-end competition. I hope Ryzen delivers.

[Zi6iX]

Well Intel had no competition for like 10 years giving them the chance to charge a lot for their superior product. Now AMD needs to gain back a lot of ground and it needs to release Ryzen at a lower price with similar performance. Quite simple honestly.

P.S. Quoting the fact that AMD released the 9590 at 800 USD is dumb argument. Don't you think they learned from past mistakes?

[Chasem121]

Imma be getting one of those 6 cores/12 threads! my 4690k has been good to me but hot damn those prices

[captain cactus]

This is what videocardz.com has:

 

https://videocardz.com/65825/first-amd-ryzen-7-1700x-benchmarks-are-here

 

A massive list of some CPU benchmarks that are amazeballs, even with the crap 17-17-17-39 2T memory timings on an A320 mobo (which explain the low physics score).

[N3v3r3nding_N3wb]

2 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

$700 would be equally appealing.... For the same price as a 6900K, you would be able to get a CPU that is just as good, a motherboard and RAM and something like an H100i!

$700 is obviously less appealing than this price.  Cheaper is always more appealing.

 

I, for one, will buy the 1700x if that or within 20 dollars of that is the price and it's competitive.  I will not buy it if it's more expensive than that.  Quantity over high margins can still equal the same profit.

[Teddy07]

I am a bit worried that AMD is gone forever if Ryzen fails, especially after their CPU head developer or whatever he was is gone

[Nup]

1 hour ago, cj09beira said:

i believe thats the idea, don't forget ryzen doesn't have graphics, that accounts for part of the price drop.

I had forgotten that completely. But to be honest i Don't think igpus have that much of a place in enthusiast parts. Other then being a handy back up. 

[captain cactus]

3 minutes ago, Teddy07 said:

I am a bit worried that AMD is gone forever if Ryzen fails, especially after their CPU head developer or whatever he was is gone

Have you read the stories? Even Intel is shitting their pants because of Ryzen. If even a company as massive as Intel is shitting their pants you know they know Ryzen will kick ass in pretty much all departments.