AMD's Z490 Chipset, Threadripper 2 in August 2018, Intel's X399 Delayed?

[Taf the Ghost]

6 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Z490 seems pretty absurd. It wouldn't accomplish anything if it was meant for TR, and they just launched X470 for Ryzen, what would they use it for? Plus they haven't used "Z" anywhere. Unless they'll replace A320 with Z490 just to make Z390 sound low end when it launches  

It wouldn't even step over an existing, recognizen name, Intel hasn't had a Z?90 yet. I don't know whether to distrust this source or distrust the minds at AMD's marketing team, but it has to be one of the two...

It's an official in-company presentation from a system builder, so the fact it's on two separate slides suggests it is real. The fact it's a surprised to even r/AMD kind of hints this is something no one has talked about. The other option is that it's simply the next full PCH upgrade for Zen2 and AMD has just made it available very early.

[AresKrieger]

AMD you really need to fire your marketing department

[Taf the Ghost]

8 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

Secret 2800X launch.

 

2 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Yeah, but it would have to be what, a 12-core? And then all those years of "all CPUs unlocked, same socket forever, come to teh dark side we have cookies" turned into "one chipset per CPU model"? I thought the idea was to one-up Intel in naming schemes, not in consumer unfriendliness  

 

(although, on a second thought, those names are par of the unfriendliness... )

I'm still going to be honestly surprised if they launch a 2800X model. Granted, we've already seen some silicon hit 4.4 Ghz, so there might be an All-Core 4.1 Ghz/4.5 Ghz max SKU that's available. However, those still make far more margin as Threadripper 2 parts.

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, RKRiley said:

Z490? first B350 and now this.

Are AMD just trying to be douches at this point? Or just trying to make consumers even more confused lol.

 

PS I do like AMD but this is a bit of a sh***y move imo.

They do it so you can easily compare similar tier products on both sides, but I agree it's needlessly confusing. They could at least add a 5 at the end to help distinguish the two, as in Z495 and B355.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

11 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

 

I'm still going to be honestly surprised if they launch a 2800X model.

I always assumed the 1800x only existed as a hype tax, since the pricing was so absurd, and everything since then has boiled down to an x and non/x version of each CPU. Hence, I never expected a 2800x (fool me once, fool me twice, and all that) or anything like that for future Zen releases.

 

But hey, if they can actually release an AM4 chipset above X470, and even call it Z490, I'm ready for anything, including a 2800x consisting on two FX-9590s glued together for an AM4 socket at $1,000 MSRP...

 

[Taf the Ghost]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I always assumed the 1800x only existed as a hype tax, since the pricing was so absurd, and everything since then has boiled down to an x and non/x version of each CPU. Hence, I never expected a 2800x (fool me once, fool me twice, and all that) or anything like that for future Zen releases.

 

But hey, if they can actually release an AM4 chipset above X470, and even call it Z490, I'm ready for anything, including a 2800x consisting on two FX-9590s glued together for an AM4 socket at $1,000 MSRP...

 

Well, there was enough space between the 1700 and 1800X to make sense. The issue is that as the production improved, the 1700 was basically almost the same as the rest of the 8c SKUs. There are still some out there that won't do above 3.7 Ghz, but most will do 3.9 Ghz. Given we're talking about Stock clocks vs OC'd, there was space. The price also came crashing down after Intel responded, but the 1800X was priced against the i7-6900K at $1000 USD. We forget that Intel wanted $170USD per core in the HEDT market less than a year ago. Intel has already dropped the Per-Core cost by 1/3rd in a year.

 

In the 2018 market, the 2800X doesn't make much sense given they didn't change the libraries on the process. (They could have shrunk the CPUs, but they took the far cheaper route of just using the optical improvements on the same general design with tweaks in the cache stuff.)

[SpaceGhostC2C]

Just now, Taf the Ghost said:

Well, there was enough space between the 1700 and 1800X to make sense.

Nah, not really. With original precision boost, it was bad enough to have two products where the only difference was how lazy you were at overclocking. There was no reason to have to "x" models, and certainly there was no reason for the 1700 and the 1800 to be $150-$200 apart. But those pre-orders must have been mana for them  

 

[Taf the Ghost]

2 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Nah, not really. With original precision boost, it was bad enough to have two products where the only difference was how lazy you were at overclocking. There was no reason to have to "x" models, and certainly there was no reason for the 1700 and the 1800 to be $150-$200 apart. But those pre-orders must have been mana for them  

 

Retailers, I think. Considering the ways the 1800X went on sale, I think most of that $499 went to the retailers. Granted, those Zen dies cost AMD somewhere less than 40USD to produce, so they've been making a lot of money off them. Their market share also might have risen between 10-20% (from 10% to 11-12%) and their gross profit margin per CPU jumped from 5% to something like 35%.

 

AMD needs to retroactively fire whoever approved Bulldozer, again.

[cj09beira]

43 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Yeah, but it would have to be what, a 12-core? And then all those years of "all CPUs unlocked, same socket forever, come to teh dark side we have cookies" turned into "one chipset per CPU model"? I thought the idea was to one-up Intel in naming schemes, not in consumer unfriendliness  

 

(although, on a second thought, those names are par of the unfriendliness... )

my guess is that it will be the same socket with extra pins used so it will be compatible with older am4 boards just without some extra features

 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

4 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

my guess is that it will be the same socket with extra pins used so it will be compatible with older am4 boards just without some extra features

 

 

Or maybe ditch APUs, slap a Vega die and perhaps some HBM2, and return to onboard graphics  

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, Sauron said:

They do it so you can easily compare similar tier products on both sides, but I agree it's needlessly confusing. They could at least add a 5 at the end to help distinguish the two, as in Z495 and B355.

HPE does that with their servers, ends with 0 = Intel and ends with 5 = AMD

 

Example:

DL380 Gen 10

DL385 Gen 10

[Brooksie359]

4 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Yeah, but it would have to be what, a 12-core? And then all those years of "all CPUs unlocked, same socket forever, come to teh dark side we have cookies" turned into "one chipset per CPU model"? I thought the idea was to one-up Intel in naming schemes, not in consumer unfriendliness  

 

(although, on a second thought, those names are par of the unfriendliness... )

The roadmap said it was on AM4 so it still would be am4 socket just different chipset.

[Kamjam21xx]

So.... 106 days until i get my threadripper 2950x ?

[dizmo]

This makes me want to boycott all AMD products in future builds.

FFS AMD, come up with your own naming scheme. Don't blatantly rip of Intel right and left.

 

[Hiitchy]

Next thing you know chipsets will follow close behind Nvidia's lineup.

 

I present to you, the Z1180T.

[Arika]

i look forward to crunched CPUS and pins when someone tries to put an intel CPU in a z490 MB or an AMD CPU in a z370 

[MrDynamicMan]

10 hours ago, Sauron said:

They do it so you can easily compare similar tier products on both sides, but I agree it's needlessly confusing. They could at least add a 5 at the end to help distinguish the two, as in Z495 and B355.

or just remove the pointless 0 at the end, with Z49, but then that would just regress back into sandy/ivy bridge in a couple generations....

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

Introducing the Gulf Ocean Ryzen Threadripper Platinium-9 50X. Compatible with Hawk's Nest-3 motherboards

Ryzen Threadripper Oceanshredder 4950X.

[Kamjam21xx]

3 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Ryzen Threadripper Oceanshredder 4950X.

Ryzen catsitter extreme delta echo niner-niner 9999x deathcore edition.

[Arika]

7 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Ryzen Threadripper Oceanshredder 4950X.

only compatible with the TR4B350Z370Z490X socket

[Kamjam21xx]

7 minutes ago, Sierra Fox said:

only compatible with the TR4B350Z370Z490X socket

Download the official XXX expansion pack to unlock hardcore mode which will turn on all 16 of your cores.

 

Shredshitter

[Stefan Payne]

14 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Also, what happened to VIA? I heard they were supposed to make a comeback this year, but I haven't heard anything since

Everything VIA you can read there (mostly English):
https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=572719

[cj09beira]

13 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

In the 2018 market, the 2800X doesn't make much sense given they didn't change the libraries on the process. (They could have shrunk the CPUs, but they took the far cheaper route of just using the optical improvements on the same general design with tweaks in the cache stuff.)

that would explain somethings but where did you get that info?

[Trixanity]

18 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

that would explain somethings but where did you get that info?

I'm fairly sure Anandtech did a detailed analysis. If I recall it's the exact same chip on a shrunk node just with some tuneup and with more dead silicon to fill in the gaps so to speak. So they basically thought it wasn't worth the effort to change things on such a minor refresh.

[leadeater]

6 hours ago, Hiitchy said:

Next thing you know chipsets will follow close behind Nvidia's lineup.

 

I present to you, the Z1180T.

Don't you mean AMD nForce5?