Amazon is taking pre-orders for the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X/2700 and Ryzen 5 2600X/2600

[Fasterthannothing]

Amazon is now taking pre-orders for the new Ryzen CPU's 

 

Ryzen 7 2700X - $329

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B428M7F&Quantity.1=1

Ryzen 7 2700 - $299

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B41717Z&Quantity.1=1

Ryzen 5 2600X - $229

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B428V2L&Quantity.1=1

Ryzen 5 2600 - $199

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B41WS48&Quantity.1=1

 

Note: The only links that show these products for pre-order will add them to your cart if you click them. 

Note for mods: I didn't add a quote or anything because this is just the links to buy the processors and if this post is in the wrong section feel free to move it. 

[Guest]

Well now it's in my cart... guess I have to.

[Orangeator]

Now it's in my cart... Hope the parents don't get to mad. Lol.

April 19th, save the date.

[tp95112]

Damn, AMD has been quiet lately.

[Ryujin2003]

WTF? Not even Prime eligible???

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Ryujin2003 said:

WTF? Not even Prime eligible???

It is.

[EunSoo]

pretty cool. I'd add in OP that the only link that works is one that tries to add it to your cart so that people don't think you're trying to do something fishy.

[Fasterthannothing]

2 minutes ago, SCGazelle said:

pretty cool. I'd add in OP that the only link that works is one that tries to add it to your cart so that people don't think you're trying to do something fishy.

Ok will do

[Ryujin2003]

29 minutes ago, Shorty88jr said:

Amazon is now taking pre-orders for the new Ryzen CPU's

 

Ryzen 7 2700X - $329

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B428M7F&Quantity.1=1

Ryzen 7 2700 - $299

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B41717Z&Quantity.1=1

Ryzen 5 2600X - $229

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B428V2L&Quantity.1=1

Ryzen 5 2600 - $199

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aws/cart/add-res.html?ASIN.1=B07B41WS48&Quantity.1=1

 

Note for mods: I didn't add a quote or anything because this is just the links to buy the processors and if this post is in the wrong section feel free to move it. 

Items are only accessible from those links. But after you add it, the product doesn't exist any longer. I think it was too early and they took everything down.

[TheUzu]

If it’s 10% better than a 1700 I’ll buy it, mainly because I have new custom sleeved cables to install due soon and if I’m taking stuff apart I might as well upgrade something.

[ATFink]

I just searched amazon for the processors and there were no results. I'm assuming OP is being truthful, so I think Amazon accidentally listed the products early and took them down... unless there is some special way for certain people to view products through Amazon prior to release.

[Fasterthannothing]

2 minutes ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Items are only accessible from those links. But after you add it, the product doesn't exist any longer. I think it was too early and they took everything down.

I'm not sure what you are saying I know the product pages don't exist but you can still add them to your cart and check out.

[ATFink]

Just now, Shorty88jr said:

I'm not sure what you are saying I know the product pages don't exist but you can still add them to your cart and check out.

How did you find the links if there weren't product pages?

[LienusLateTips]

1 minute ago, ATFink said:

How did you find the links if there weren't product pages?

I think they got taken down earlier.

When I click on the links I get this

 

[Fasterthannothing]

Just now, ATFink said:

How did you find the links if there weren't product pages?

I am a secret Amazon product finding ninja jk found the links on a reddit post dont know how the person found them on there though: 

 

[Taf the Ghost]

11 minutes ago, TheUzu said:

If it’s 10% better than a 1700 I’ll buy it, mainly because I have new custom sleeved cables to install due soon and if I’m taking stuff apart I might as well upgrade something.

OC vs Stock or Stock vs Stock? Depending where your first one landed on the silicon lottery, could be a pretty solid update. If you got a good part in Gen 1 with well-tuned RAM, probably not a huge amount of upgrade space for the cost.

 

Though, we're about a month away from some pretty unbearable comments sections. We've got enough information already about the memory & cache latency improvements that a 2600 or better with well dialed in memory is going to be pretty much on par with Intel, clock for clock, in most games. It's going to be ugly.

[Rune]

Yay! Glad this has been announced now. Can't wait to see the lines at 9am

[TheUzu]

4 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

OC vs Stock or Stock vs Stock? Depending where your first one landed on the silicon lottery, could be a pretty solid update. If you got a good part in Gen 1 with well-tuned RAM, probably not a huge amount of upgrade space for the cost.

 

Though, we're about a month away from some pretty unbearable comments sections. We've got enough information already about the memory & cache latency improvements that a 2600 or better with well dialed in memory is going to be pretty much on par with Intel, clock for clock, in most games. It's going to be ugly.

Well 3.7GHz was all I could knock out without getting into the uncomfortable voltage department, RAM stable at 2933.

 

I suppose if I can get the thing to 4.3GHz and run the RAM at 3200 like it should that’d be solid enough for me to go for it.

[Fasterthannothing]

3 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

OC vs Stock or Stock vs Stock? Depending where your first one landed on the silicon lottery, could be a pretty solid update. If you got a good part in Gen 1 with well-tuned RAM, probably not a huge amount of upgrade space for the cost.

 

Though, we're about a month away from some pretty unbearable comments sections. We've got enough information already about the memory & cache latency improvements that a 2600 or better with well dialed in memory is going to be pretty much on par with Intel, clock for clock, in most games. It's going to be ugly.

Yeah its going to be interesting to see what the performance will be compared to Intel. The only thing though is I see a repeat of what happened last time where AMD came out with something that had good performance for the money compared to Intel and Intel was just like well guess what look what we have a new CPU with 6 cores but this time it will be an 8 core version. 

[Taf the Ghost]

1 hour ago, TheUzu said:

Well 3.7GHz was all I could knock out without getting into the uncomfortable voltage department, RAM stable at 2933.

 

I suppose if I can get the thing to 4.3GHz and run the RAM at 3200 like it should that’d be solid enough for me to go for it.

4.2 to 4.3 on the primary thread and 3200 low latency RAM will probably render a pretty sizable improvement comparatively, but that'll take some time to see from advanced testing.

 

We'll see what happens when we get X470 boards and XFR2, as well. There's a very real possibility that Gen 2 Ryzen really doesn't get any benefit from an OC on the X parts.

1 hour ago, Shorty88jr said:

Yeah its going to be interesting to see what the performance will be compared to Intel. The only thing though is I see a repeat of what happened last time where AMD came out with something that had good performance for the money compared to Intel and Intel was just like well guess what look what we have a new CPU with 6 cores but this time it will be an 8 core version. 

The rumor of the 8c Coffee Lake part in Q3 still persist, so, yeah, Intel is doing that again. Though 6c, for Intel's uArch, is the sweet spot for any Consumer-focused system. 8c is actually going to be worse than the 8700k is most situations, unless they bin it for 5.0 to 5.2 single-core boost. Even then, 8 "Coffee Lake" cores is going to be a thirsty chip.

 

The real issue is the latency improvements with Ryzen Gen 2. It seems like it shouldn't matter, but it really, really does for Nvidia's drivers in most games. When using the 1080 Ti for testing, that ends up mattering for how good Intel vs AMD compares. If game testing responds about the way it does to better RAM timings on Ryzen, we could see some really sizable gaming performance improvements. (Even if it mostly won't show up until at least a 1080.)

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Orangeator said:

Now it's in my cart... Hope the parents don't get to mad. Lol.

April 19th, save the date.

Select next day shipping then complain when it doesn't arrive tomorrow 

[Fasterthannothing]

14 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

4.2 to 4.3 on the primary thread and 3200 low latency RAM will probably render a pretty sizable improvement comparatively, but that'll take some time to see from advanced testing.

 

We'll see what happens when we get X470 boards and XFR2, as well. There's a very real possibility that Gen 2 Ryzen really doesn't get any benefit from an OC on the X parts.

The rumor of the 8c Coffee Lake part in Q3 still persist, so, yeah, Intel is doing that again. Though 6c, for Intel's uArch, is the sweet spot for any Consumer-focused system. 8c is actually going to be worse than the 8700k is most situations, unless they bin it for 5.0 to 5.2 single-core boost. Even then, 8 "Coffee Lake" cores is going to be a thirsty chip.

 

The real issue is the latency improvements with Ryzen Gen 2. It seems like it shouldn't matter, but it really, really does for Nvidia's drivers in most games. When using the 1080 Ti for testing, that ends up mattering for how good Intel vs AMD compares. If game testing responds about the way it does to better RAM timings on Ryzen, we could see some really sizable gaming performance improvements. (Even if it mostly won't show up until at least a 1080.)

Yeah I'm really looking forward to some real benchmarks for the new chips to see how they do in gaming. I am upgrading my rig this summer and if the performance is the same or close for gaming I'll most likely go for AMD. Hopefully they can make good enough performance improvements that even if Intel does come out with an 8c chip it will perform close enough for the money (I don't think they could beat Intel in terms of performance if Intel does make an 8c chip). I disagree with you about the chip speeds for the 8c that Intel is supposedly releasing. I thinks its totally possible for them to make a CPU with a high frequency and high core count. They seem to be able to make their chips clock speed faster every iteration. If AMD doesn't knock it out of the park with their new CPU's and their upcoming GPU's they are going to have a hard time having a sustainable business model. When they are having to collaborate with Intel you know they are in a dire situation. 

[johnukguy]

2 hours ago, ATFink said:

I just searched amazon for the processors and there were no results. I'm assuming OP is being truthful, so I think Amazon accidentally listed the products early and took them down... unless there is some special way for certain people to view products through Amazon prior to release.

You can add them to your cart but they've taken down the listings. Frankly though, you'll likely get a better deal at Microcenter, Staples or Frys, if you're close to one of those in the US.

[Taf the Ghost]

9 minutes ago, Shorty88jr said:

Yeah I'm really looking forward to some real benchmarks for the new chips to see how they do in gaming. I am upgrading my rig this summer and if the performance is the same or close for gaming I'll most likely go for AMD. Hopefully they can make good enough performance improvements that even if Intel does come out with an 8c chip it will perform close enough for the money (I don't think they could beat Intel in terms of performance if Intel does make an 8c chip). I disagree with you about the chip speeds for the 8c that Intel is supposedly releasing. I thinks its totally possible for them to make a CPU with a high frequency and high core count. They seem to be able to make their chips clock speed faster every iteration. If AMD doesn't knock it out of the park with their new CPU's and their upcoming GPU's they are going to have a hard time having a sustainable business model. When they are having to collaborate with Intel you know they are in a dire situation. 

There's very few games where 6c/12t will perform worse than 8c/16t, even going forward. (And Nvidia's driver tends to populate in chunks of 6 threads, so 6, 12, 18, ...) And it's not like you can't buy a high-end 8c Skylake part right now in the i7-7820X.  https://ark.intel.com/products/123767/Intel-Core-i7-7820X-X-series-Processor-11M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz Has a TDP of 140w, which is actually the issue, then you get the whole X299 VRM issue as well.

 

It's not that it wouldn't be a good part, it'd just be slower than a 8700k in almost all situations unless they clocked it higher. If they did, it'd use at least 33% more power & produce roughly that much more heat. Which is why I think we'll get a single-core boost part that hits 5.0, just so it looks better.

[Fasterthannothing]

1 hour ago, Taf the Ghost said:

There's very few games where 6c/12t will perform worse than 8c/16t, even going forward. (And Nvidia's driver tends to populate in chunks of 6 threads, so 6, 12, 18, ...) And it's not like you can't buy a high-end 8c Skylake part right now in the i7-7820X.  https://ark.intel.com/products/123767/Intel-Core-i7-7820X-X-series-Processor-11M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz Has a TDP of 140w, which is actually the issue, then you get the whole X299 VRM issue as well.

 

It's not that it wouldn't be a good part, it'd just be slower than a 8700k in almost all situations unless they clocked it higher. If they did, it'd use at least 33% more power & produce roughly that much more heat. Which is why I think we'll get a single-core boost part that hits 5.0, just so it looks better.

Ok you seem to know your stuff about the Nvidia drivers but it doesn't make that much sense because that would mean that if its in 6 thread chunks then something like a 4c/8t cpu would do much worse than they do compared to a 6c/12t cpu in games. From what I've seen is as long as the chip with more cores has clock speeds that are just as fast as the chip with fewer cores and the game is properly optimized for the number of cores then its the same speed on single threaded games and faster on multi threaded games. Now I could be completely confused though on how this all works so correct me if Im on the wrong train of thought but.Take for example this review: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-core-i7-7820x-skylake-x,review-33961.html when they overclocked it to around the same clock speed of a 7700k it performed around the same some times slightly higher or lower on games un optimized for multi cores and much better on games optimized for multi cores. Also what about AMD drivers how do they work in terms of populating do they also do it in chunks of 6 or is it different? I dont have an AMD GPU but im curious to understand how their drivers work. Also the problem with comparing the i7 7820x to the Ice lake cpu coming out is its 10nm vs 14nm so lower power draw cooler temps etc. allowing for faster speeds.