• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Zen - Key Dates and Information

Page 17 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
dahorns said:
On a related note, do we know if the Ryzen turbo is all core or some fraction?
Click to expand...
There is both, and something inbetween, likely also depending on the amount of active cores, their actual power consumption and temperatures, application behaviour (e.g. if turbo doesn't make an app faster, the CPU might use the power elsewhere), etc.
 
raghu78 said:
So it will be a very close contest. Hopefully AMD is sensible enough to price their SR CPUs from USD 200 - USD 500. If AMD can get a 3.4 Ghz base clock 8C/16T with the Wraith cooler at USD 400 and a 3.6 Ghz base clock 8C/16T with an AIO cooler at USD 500 they will do very well.
Click to expand...

As posted elsewhere they are still in the decision process when it comes to prices, but that should be about their targeted range, although starting from quite lower than 200$ if we are to interpret the 4C/4T sampled chips, at 120$ such a SKU would still provide 50% gross margin, wich is huge for a fabless company..

At CES, the company openly asked journalists what it should be priced at. Price an eight-core Ryzen at around £400/$500 and you bring down the cost of eight-core chips to that of a six-core—a solid move for consumers, but not one that will greatly affect mainstream performance. Price it the same as a quad-core i7-7700K—about £300/$330—and you dramatically shake up the industry. The decision is yet to be made.

"There are a lot of discussions going on," says Hallock. "We're capturing the feedback. We wanna take share, we wanna be the best price/performance option, we wanna be the first on people's minds. That's part of the bounding box for pricing discussions as well as paying off the R&D investment... We're looking at what Intel does—and we're not gonna do that. We think people want the choice, and need the choice. The market needs the choice—hopefully we can turn it around.
Click to expand...


http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/01/amd-ryzen-motherboards-hype/
 
Dresdenboy said:
There is both, and something inbetween, likely also depending on the amount of active cores, their actual power consumption and temperatures, application behaviour (e.g. if turbo doesn't make an app faster, the CPU might use the power elsewhere), etc.
Click to expand...

I should have clarified, I meant to ask if the 4.0 boost is all core or something less.
 
Abwx said:
As posted elsewhere they are still in the decision process when it comes to prices, but that should be about their targeted range, although starting from quite lower than 200$ if we are to interpret the 4C/4T sampled chips, at 120$ such a SKU would still provide 50% gross margin, wich is huge for a fabless company..
Click to expand...

$100-120 doesn't sound unreasonable for for a 4C/4T Ryzen. The 880K (2M/4T@4-4.2GHz) retails for ~$100 after all, the 845 is only ~$70 but you do sacrifice some frequency.
 
4Ghz , at least on the 3.6/4Ghz ES, is reserved only for one thread workloads. All core boost and half core boost should be somewhere in the middle, likely 3.7-3.8Ghz range (my guess). Ryzen can adjust Turbo in 25Mhz intervals so it is very precise.
 
dahorns said:
I should have clarified, I meant to ask if the 4.0 boost is all core or something less.
Click to expand...

Obviously we don't know for sure yet.

In general one would assume max turbo is not for all cores - if they could guarantee all cores at that speed (within temp/power) then it would be the base clock.

You could simplify it and think max turbo is for one core and base is for all cores being used... But this is much too general also: It all depends on what instructions are being run. So who knows? Perhaps all cores could boost to max under certain situations.
 
Insert_Nickname said:
$100-120 doesn't sound unreasonable for for a 4C/4T Ryzen. The 880K (2M/4T@4-4.2GHz) retails for ~$100 after all, the 845 is only ~$70 but you do sacrifice some frequency.
Click to expand...

I agree. 8T Ryzen should be i5 7600K price range and 4T version should be ~20-30% cheaper, depending on relative performance Vs i5 (base/turbo clock is likely going to be lower and not by a small amount).
 
Might be, but:
1. Every Ryzen can be overclocked, even on cheap(er) B350 boards
2. Stock performance will be more than enough, unless you plan to use GTX 1080 in SLI, or make simulation of spaceship entering Earth's atmosphere
 
dahorns said:
I should have clarified, I meant to ask if the 4.0 boost is all core or something less.
Click to expand...
No problem. As said by inf64, this is for 1C. This boost limit might either be removed for final SKUs with XFR or be a guaranteed lower limit with just 1C.
 
Dresdenboy said:
No problem. As said by inf64, this is for 1C. This boost limit might either be removed for final SKUs with XFR or be a guaranteed lower limit with just 1C.
Click to expand...
I don't think we need to be concerned at all with turbo mechanics: between XFR and unlocked multi on every Zen SKU, the only limits a DIY customer will face in configuring their Zen setup will be cooling capacity, MB power delivery, silicon lottery for the chip itself. The turbo stuff will likely affect OEM builds.
 
First, we need to figure out which core configurations AMD will be making. Does anyone even have a sample of a 4 or 6 core? And if each processor can overclock by itself, what's the point of having more than one model with the same core count?
 
turtile said:
First, we need to figure out which core configurations AMD will be making. Does anyone even have a sample of a 4 or 6 core? And if each processor can overclock by itself, what's the point of having more than one model with the same core count?
Click to expand...

A couple of reasons:
  • Auto overclocking may not be enabled by default intentionally
  • Binning based on auto overclocking potential
  • Segmentation for OEMs who turn the auto-OC off
 
Rifter said:
Only a VERY small portion of the population overclocks, thats why.
Click to expand...

But isn't AMD releasing these specifically for this type of market and later releasing professional and consumer variants? It just seems strange to offer a CPU at 3.4Ghz and 3.6Ghz when both will likely hit the same speed.
 
turtile said:
It just seems strange to offer a CPU at 3.4Ghz and 3.6Ghz when both will likely hit the same speed.
Click to expand...
Will they? 🙂

Here's what siliconlottery.com can tell us about a newly released CPU
74% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 4.9GHz
56% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz
26% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 5.1GHz
5% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 5.2GHz
Click to expand...

If you choose the better performers as 3.6Ghz SKU and the weaker parts as 3.4Ghz SKU, even with some overlapping in overclocking potential the chances still heavily favor 3.6Ghz SKU to clock higher.

PS: imagine one plays Russian roulette with either 1 bullet or 2 bullets in the cylinder. Even if one survives both "games", chances of survival were quite different to begin with. (yes, this was not a car analogy 🙂)
 
Last edited:
coercitiv said:
Will they? 🙂

Here's what siliconlottery.com can tell us about a newly released CPU


If you choose the better performers as 3.6Ghz SKU and the weaker parts as 3.4Ghz SKU, even with some overlapping in overclocking potential the chances still heavily favor 3.6Ghz SKU to clock higher.

PS: imagine one plays Russian roulette with either 1 bullet or 2 bullets in the cylinder. Even if one survives both "games", chances of survival were quite different to begin with. (yes, this was not a car analogy 🙂)
Click to expand...

yeah, but this is different with Zen and the way it auto-OC's right? Point being that a "3.4ghz" Zen should easily hit 3.6 on its own, so what's the point of a 3.4ghz? I guess just more silicon you can sell at a lower price?
 
zinfamous said:
Point being that a "3.4ghz" Zen should easily hit 3.6 on its own, so what's the point of a 3.4ghz?
Click to expand...
On average, at the power required for the lower SKU to hit 3.6Ghz oc, the higher SKU will hit 3.75GHz+ oc. Chip quality is still a deciding factor on what you can achieve in terms of speed even without the multi lock.
 
imported_jjj said:
If AMD wants to sell 500k units for 6 and 8 cores , they should price 8 cores at 600-700$. Intel can easily price 10 cores at 999$ with 8 and 6 cores just 50$ above AMD to just end all the AMD hype.
Click to expand...

Why so much? I think they should top out at ~$500. Intel won't want to bring their entire HEDT line (sans 6950x) to $550 or lower. That will kill their margins.

High pricing=tiny market, that's a fact not a supposition.
Click to expand...

AMD's current market potential is already tiny for reasons having nothing to do with pricing. Well, maybe not tiny, but still rather small.

coercitiv said:
On average, at the power required for the lower SKU to hit 3.6Ghz oc, the higher SKU will hit 3.75GHz+ oc. Chip quality is still a deciding factor on what you can achieve in terms of speed even without the multi lock.
Click to expand...

Cooling is also a factor. You can push lower bins pretty high, but it'll take more voltage (and more aggressive cooling) to get there.
 
zinfamous said:
yeah, but this is different with Zen and the way it auto-OC's right? Point being that a "3.4ghz" Zen should easily hit 3.6 on its own, so what's the point of a 3.4ghz? I guess just more silicon you can sell at a lower price?
Click to expand...

Will the auto-OC also work on board that don't support overclocking? 😉
 
CHADBOGA said:
For whatever reason, even if this has been posted multiple times recently, I only got to find out about it because of your post, so there is no need for you to feel sheepish for posting it.
Click to expand...

Mee too, ive been watching like a hawk but also missed this untill that post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top