Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community (https://www.overclock.net/forum/)
-   Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles (https://www.overclock.net/forum/379-rumors-unconfirmed-articles/)
-   -   [Forbes] AMD In Shock Intel-Smashing Performance Claim: Is Cinebench Score Really True? (https://www.overclock.net/forum/379-rumors-unconfirmed-articles/1726326-forbes-amd-shock-intel-smashing-performance-claim-cinebench-score-really-true.html)

Moparman 05-23-2019 01:21 PM

[Forbes] AMD In Shock Intel-Smashing Performance Claim: Is Cinebench Score Really True?
 
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyl...ally-true/amp/


"We’re just a week away from hopefully knowing more about AMD's plans for its Zen 2-based 3rd Generation Ryzen processors and more rumors are surfacing of AMD’s new CPU’s performance. This time, the channel on YouTube claims to have received a screenshot of a Cinebench score of the supposed 3rd Generation Ryzen flagship – a yet unknown 16-core CPU running at 4.2GHz and obtaining a result of 4,278 points.
That is an absolutely huge score and not just for a mainstream desktop CPU. As you can see below, that score matches or betters every other desktop CPU except for AMD’s Threadripper WX-series, which have 24 and 32 cores respectively. Even the mighty Core i9-9980XE, with 18 cores is no quicker, which clearly has huge ramifications in terms of multi-threaded performance given that AMD’s 16-core 3rd Generation Ryzen CPU, if it does exist, has been rumored to result in plenty of change from $1,000 (in fact some claimed leaks via retailers put it at less than $600)."




If true this is very good news for AMD.

Hwgeek 05-23-2019 01:24 PM

Be Ready for Ryzen 9 3900X!

Puck 05-23-2019 02:10 PM

That much performance at a $600 price point seems way too good to be true.

If so, it would definitely be my next chip instead of a Threadripper like planned.

doom26464 05-23-2019 02:11 PM

Pass the salt please.

Hwgeek 05-23-2019 02:14 PM

They won't sell it less then $699, The question is where TR4 is going.
Also for $699 for smaller AM4 CPU + X570 chipset income- they maybe gonna make more money then 1950X/2950X alone.

Imglidinhere 05-23-2019 02:17 PM

Didn't AMD already state that they didn't want to be stuck in the lower-end segments anymore? I mean, call me crazy, but if AMD produces something faster than Intel, they shouldn't have to resort to selling it for cheaper to maintain market share.

If this is true, I wouldn't mind seeing it sold for over $750. If its genuinely that much faster, then why should they hinder their own potential profit making?

Hwgeek 05-23-2019 02:21 PM

+1, if they win over Intel both in MT and ST then there is no reason to sell them at cheap like you can see now Ryzen [email protected] $199.

kd5151 05-23-2019 02:36 PM

Only time will tell.

zealord 05-23-2019 02:44 PM

The weekend will fly by and then we will know. I think the keynote is late sunday for americans and early monday morning for Europe if I am not mistaken.

I am in desperate need to upgrade and I hope that Zen2 comes in swinging. I don't even need a 12c or 16c CPU, I would prefer a high clocked 8c/16t CPU !

Ragnarok 05-23-2019 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imglidinhere (Post 27976978)
Didn't AMD already state that they didn't want to be stuck in the lower-end segments anymore? I mean, call me crazy, but if AMD produces something faster than Intel, they shouldn't have to resort to selling it for cheaper to maintain market share.

If this is true, I wouldn't mind seeing it sold for over $750. If its genuinely that much faster, then why should they hinder their own potential profit making?

The problem is mindshare. I've known people to choose Intel over AMD simply by brand recognition alone. I don't think AMD can sell anything for more than Intel. IMO, at best, the top AMD chip could perform better than Intel's at the same price.

kyrie74 05-23-2019 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imglidinhere (Post 27976978)
Didn't AMD already state that they didn't want to be stuck in the lower-end segments anymore? I mean, call me crazy, but if AMD produces something faster than Intel, they shouldn't have to resort to selling it for cheaper to maintain market share.

If this is true, I wouldn't mind seeing it sold for over $750. If its genuinely that much faster, then why should they hinder their own potential profit making?

Did you say the same thing when AMD brought the 8C/16T 1800x to market for $500 and put it up against Intel's $500 4C/8T?

Section31 05-23-2019 03:15 PM

Hopefully AMD does price close to rumored. That is way tech should be priced, we let intel/nvidia get away with there high pricing and they maintain way too high gross margin percentage on consumer side. Enterprise has it worse than us though, they are paying lot more than they really should be.

You can already see the pricing effect on phones, they keep on going up each year and even the Apple Iphone yearly upgrade group is now going through longer upgrade cycles.

Hwgeek 05-23-2019 03:17 PM

To change this mindset - only by doing something that will make huge headlines all over the web, if they make another product that is like 2700X vs 8700K VS 9900K then nothing will change, but if they make headlines like "The King is Dead- Long live the King" then this will start the transition.
If they Release lets say this 16C that can match 9900K's ST while competing with i9 9980XE in MT then they will make the Headline they need.

deafboy 05-23-2019 03:55 PM

Fingers crossed

ejb222 05-23-2019 05:04 PM

I believe Jim's leak about performance, not sure on price. I definitely want square competition in the market. It's not only good for the consumer, it's way more entertaining than rehashed products every year. Guess we will know for sure on Monday :D

papant7 05-23-2019 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ragnarok (Post 27977026)
The problem is mindshare. I've known people to choose Intel over AMD simply by brand recognition alone. I don't think AMD can sell anything for more than Intel. IMO, at best, the top AMD chip could perform better than Intel's at the same price.

It's also the supply chain. The number of AMD suppliers is tiny compared to Intel. As someone who works with big data and needs to expand data centers regularly, AMD simply cannot match the support and availability of Intel. Despite the various vulnerabilities of Intel, Epyc is simply not a viable choice due to suppliers not being able to meet our demands. Also, with Intel, its possible to get a "whole" Intel server. Processor: Intel, Chipset: Intel,NIC: Intel, SSD: Intel, RAM: Samsung (lol). AMD cannot simply do that unfortunately thus bringing Intel's brand in the forefront.

rdr09 05-24-2019 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papant7 (Post 27977370)
It's also the supply chain. The number of AMD suppliers is tiny compared to Intel. As someone who works with big data and needs to expand data centers regularly, AMD simply cannot match the support and availability of Intel. Despite the various vulnerabilities of Intel, Epyc is simply not a viable choice due to suppliers not being able to meet our demands. Also, with Intel, its possible to get a "whole" Intel server. Processor: Intel, Chipset: Intel,NIC: Intel, SSD: Intel, RAM: Samsung (lol). AMD cannot simply do that unfortunately thus bringing Intel's brand in the forefront.

I agree. Most countries in Africa, for example, get a supply of oem machines from Dell and HP with intel inside. Ask them about amd systems, they don't have a clue. Most of the private and public offices, if not all, only use intel machines. Somehow intel knows not to neglect these places. Intel support exists.

Clocknut 05-24-2019 12:59 AM

LEL, forbes take AdoredTV leak more serious than /r/hardware reddit.

epic1337 05-24-2019 03:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moparman (Post 27976902)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyl...ally-true/amp/


"We’re just a week away from hopefully knowing more about AMD's plans for its Zen 2-based 3rd Generation Ryzen processors and more rumors are surfacing of AMD’s new CPU’s performance. This time, the AdoredTV channel on YouTube claims to have received a screenshot of a Cinebench score of the supposed 3rd Generation Ryzen flagship – a yet unknown 16-core CPU running at 4.2GHz and obtaining a result of 4,278 points.
That is an absolutely huge score and not just for a mainstream desktop CPU. As you can see below, that score matches or betters every other desktop CPU except for AMD’s Threadripper WX-series, which have 24 and 32 cores respectively. Even the mighty Core i9-9980XE, with 18 cores is no quicker, which clearly has huge ramifications in terms of multi-threaded performance given that AMD’s 16-core 3rd Generation Ryzen CPU, if it does exist, has been rumored to result in plenty of change from $1,000 (in fact some claimed leaks via retailers put it at less than $600)."




If true this is very good news for AMD.

theoretically possible if AMD's hyperthreading scaled like real cores, e.g. performing like a 32C/32T instead of 16C/32T.

Hwgeek 05-24-2019 03:43 AM

if 8c es were able to score 2000+pts at +-65W, whats the problem getting 4300pts with OCed 16C? This level of performance is possible and it's only a question if and how AMD would choose to position it.

Lexi is Dumb 05-24-2019 04:22 AM

Personally I think the problem is everyone is looking at these rumours from the perspective of having only had 3% IPC jumps on similar nodes for like 4 years now, AMD included with Zen+. This isn't a minor architecture tweak, it's a new architecture coupled with a decent node shrink.. I think we've forgotten what is reasonable to expect from that.

As far as I can tell, edging out intel on a newer better smaller process through TSMC over their old GloFo 12/14nm process with a new architecture VS Intels same iterative architecture from the last like 3-4 years still on 14nm.. is actually pretty underwhelming. Impressive given their position over the last 7 years, but frankly these are the performance gains we should be expecting at minimum not calling an over hyping dream. We aren't back to real competition until its just normal for a new CPU generation to beat the competitors last one.

epic1337 05-24-2019 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27977566)
if 8c es were able to score 2000+pts at +-65W, whats the problem getting 4300pts with OCed 16C? This level of performance is possible and it's only a question if and how AMD would choose to position it.

because of scaling.
https://www.cgdirector.com/cinebench...core_5000_area

you can't just stuff more cores and expect the score to rise up proportionately.

Particle 05-24-2019 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imglidinhere (Post 27976978)
Didn't AMD already state that they didn't want to be stuck in the lower-end segments anymore? I mean, call me crazy, but if AMD produces something faster than Intel, they shouldn't have to resort to selling it for cheaper to maintain market share.

If this is true, I wouldn't mind seeing it sold for over $750. If its genuinely that much faster, then why should they hinder their own potential profit making?

I'd rather argue that Intel is overpricing instead of AMD is underpricing.

Ultimately, I'm sure they'll generate estimates from which to derive the ideal price/volume/profit ratio. If they think they can sell five times as many units by taking a twenty percent cut to per-unit profit versus what they would make at a competitor's price point, they should and would go with the lower price.

ZealotKi11er 05-24-2019 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Particle (Post 27977658)
I'd rather argue that Intel is overpricing instead of AMD is underpricing.

Ultimately, I'm sure they'll generate estimates from which to derive the ideal price/volume/profit ratio. If they think they can sell five times as many units by taking a twenty percent cut to per-unit profit versus what they would make at a competitor's price point, they should and would go with the lower price.

Intel is definitely overpriced. Once you factor how there is next to no R&D since 6700K-9900K only thing that has changed is larger die size but 14nm has gotten better. It probably cost intel <$100 to make 9900K. The margins are huge. They are a high margin company after all. Same thing with Nvidia.

Hwgeek 05-24-2019 07:00 AM

I think Intel will announce X299 22C CPU, there was already such core count on X99(E5-2699 v4) so they will do the same to answer Amd's 16c.
The hard part will be finding the right model name- since they already used 9990XE for 14c LOL.

bmgjet 05-24-2019 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27977694)
I think Intel will announce X299 22C CPU, there was already such core count on X99(E5-2699 v4) so they will do the same to answer Amd's 16c.
The hard part will be finding the right model name- since they already used 9990XE for 14c LOL.

Could call it the 9999XE.

Then they are ready to annouce there 10K series on all new 10NM.

Hwgeek 05-24-2019 07:10 AM

ROFL!

bigjdubb 05-24-2019 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27977694)
I think Intel will announce X299 22C CPU, there was already such core count on X99(E5-2699 v4) so they will do the same to answer Amd's 16c.
The hard part will be finding the right model name- since they already used 9990XE for 14c LOL.

Sounds about right. Intels answer to AMD's $600 16 core processor will be a $2,200 22 core that comes with it's it's own 50 amp breaker (installation not included) so you can overclock it. It'll sell.

Hwgeek 05-24-2019 08:10 AM

Maybe we will be lucky to see it in LIVE Demo @5.0Ghz! LOL.

ZealotKi11er 05-24-2019 10:29 AM

5GHz seems like a stretch. Maybe some core but not all. 5.0GHz XFR... 2700X technically 4.35Ghz XFR.

Streetdragon 05-24-2019 10:37 AM

16 cores i would say, all cores 4.2Ghz, 8 Cores 4.6Ghz and one core 5.2Ghz or so

Simular to 12 core cpu

bigjdubb 05-24-2019 10:57 AM

I think he was making a joke about the 22 core Intel processor we made up.

I will be happily surprised if there are any 5.0ghz all core Zen 2 processors.

rdr09 05-24-2019 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epic1337 (Post 27977642)
because of scaling.
https://www.cgdirector.com/cinebench...core_5000_area

you can't just stuff more cores and expect the score to rise up proportionately.


Maybe you are right.

R5 1600 @ 3.9 > 1360/6 = 227
R7 2700 @ 4.1 > 1903/8 = 238
16 @ 4.2 > 2478/16 = 155

Now it's right.

Gunderman456 05-24-2019 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Section31 (Post 27977046)
Hopefully AMD does price close to rumored. That is way tech should be priced, we let intel/nvidia get away with there high pricing and they maintain way too high gross margin percentage on consumer side. Enterprise has it worse than us though, they are paying lot more than they really should be.

You can already see the pricing effect on phones, they keep on going up each year and even the Apple Iphone yearly upgrade group is now going through longer upgrade cycles.

No, no like some here are pleading, AMD should price it at $1000. It's not like Intel and Nvidia have been fleecing or anything. So since Intel's price is at $700 and AMD's will be faster and they are a business after all they should price their superior product at $1000. Hurp, Durp...

I'm going to bang my head on the wall. Be right back to price my new system at $7000 so I can play the latest and greatest games!

AlphaC 05-24-2019 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdr09 (Post 27978010)
Maybe you are right.

R5 1600 @ 3.9 > 1360/6 = 227
R7 2700 @ 4.1 > 1903/8 = 238
16 @ 4.2 > 2478/16 = 155

Now it's right.

Amdahl's law

rdr09 05-24-2019 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaC (Post 27978088)
Amdahl's law

I messed up. It's . . .

4278/16 = 267

Too high.

tubers 05-24-2019 03:42 PM

Man. 16 Cores sounds crazy compared to i9-9900K

I have a feeling it'll be more like:

12C/24T R9 to compete with i9.
10C R7 no SMT to compete with i7.
8C R5 no SMT to compete with i5.
6C R3 no SMT to compete with i3.

NihilOC 05-24-2019 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er (Post 27977680)
Intel is definitely overpriced. Once you factor how there is next to no R&D since 6700K-9900K only thing that has changed is larger die size but 14nm has gotten better. It probably cost intel <$100 to make 9900K. The margins are huge. They are a high margin company after all. Same thing with Nvidia.

Whilst I appreciate that there is probably very little R&D for recent generations they have a 13 billion USD R&D budget, it's not like they can go "oh well we only did x R&D for this specific product, so let's sell it at ~20% over cost." Especially since they'd then be massively reducing demand for their next generation of CPUs, no matter the performance gain if they just swamped the market with half decent processors at 1/5 the price they won't sell anything new for a while.

Taking NV as an example their revenue in 2018 was 9.71B, cost of goods sold was 3.88B with 1.88B spent on R&D. Less some overhead and their earnings before tax were 3.21B. Fairly extraordinary, and I imagine that more competition would have the potential to lower card costs given the margin available, but they certainly aren't gouging consumers to quite the extent that some make out on these forums. I also doubt we'd be seeing significant reductions across the board, it would likely only be particularly pronounced on the very high margin products.

Section31 05-24-2019 05:22 PM

Pricing will be key for consumer side. If its pricing is close to rumored and hits 5ghz, watch those x299 owners (with 7900x onwards) jump boat. If its pricing is 1000usd, I will use my 7920x for another couple years till intel 7nm comes out.

The shortfalls of that whole x299 platform make me want to dump it but I don't want to spend too much on stop gap solution. Its actually an win-win for people if AMD does that because the people looking for good deals can then get these x299 owners mobo/cpu for incredibly low prices. (say 150usd for 7900x and 400usd for 7980xe and maybe even get the mobo for free - since the owners probably used monoblocks or watercooled vrm and probably didn't keep or destroyed the original cpu heatsink).

epic1337 05-24-2019 05:33 PM

well technically, although their CPUs have only gone through refinements, their R&D is largely focused on their IGP.
they even went so far as ditch the processor and make a dedicated GPU, they're pretty serious with their graphics processor.

so you're probably paying for the R&D of the part which you didn't really want.

ozlay 05-24-2019 06:05 PM

Currently you can get a 2950x for $800. While the 1950x sells for $600. A 3850X for $600 doesn't seem unreasonable. An AM4 chip should cost less then a TR4.

The 1950x cost $1000 when it came out. But a year later the 2950x cost $900. If we follow that pattern a 3950x would cost $800. However a 3950x would be TR4 not AM4. The difference between the 1900x TR4 and 1800x AM4 when they came out was $200. So a 3850x would be $200 cheaper then a 3950x. Making the 3850x $600. :p

guttheslayer 05-24-2019 10:02 PM

You ppl bash Jim but it turned out he was mostly true.

Don't you forget even LISA herself tweeted him?


16C/32T is coming and I love to see those who keep assuring the world it will never happen to mainstream to eat their own words

Defoler 05-24-2019 11:54 PM

I'll wait until the CPU actually releases.
Seems too good to be true.
If the CPU is real, I very much doubt they will price it as mid-low point. And I would expect it to be 2000$ or so. If they get the best of the best, AMD will not be hesitant to put a high price on it.

Nizzen 05-25-2019 12:03 AM

My Threadripper 1950x suddenly became worthless :p

Hwgeek 05-25-2019 12:03 AM

Let's place Bets:
Ryzen 9 3900X/3900 16c/32t -$699/$649
Ryzen 9 3800X/3900 12c/24t -$599/$549
Ryzen 7 3700X/3700 8c/16t -$399/$349

Marios145 05-25-2019 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guttheslayer (Post 27978352)
You ppl bash Jim but it turned out he was mostly true.

Don't you forget even LISA herself tweeted him?


16C/32T is coming and I love to see those who keep assuring the world it will never happen to mainstream to eat their own words

Intel's damage control is working overtime.

Meanwhile, amd didn't disclose ANY frequencies and only spoke of 8core chips, every ES is low clocked, all we have are rumours and "leaks" that created expectations of 16c 5ghz chips.

Just wait and see how ryzen 3000 becomes a "fail" if final clocks dont reach the magical 5ghz number.

Section31 05-25-2019 01:21 AM

29 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nizzen (Post 27978410)
My Threadripper 1950x suddenly became worthless [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif[/IMG]

Not worthless. It still very good as with all other modern cpus. Software developers in general just starting to take advantage of more than four cores. In my field, an 16core will not really help as the software in general is so poorly coded that even an 16core can be slow. Does productivity software and normal tasks perform better between an 6/8 core versus 16core in real life

Mainly its enuthiast who get hurt because they chase the best.

Lexi is Dumb 05-25-2019 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27978412)
Let's place Bets:
Ryzen 9 3900X/3900 16c/32t -$699/$649
Ryzen 9 3800X/3900 12c/24t -$599/$549
Ryzen 7 3700X/3700 8c/16t -$399/$349

The 1700X launched at $399. The 2700X launched at $329.
If the 8 core chip launches at a higher price than the 2700X did, ill be a little bit disappointed.

The 1700 was $329, with the 2700 following at 299.

I'd love to see the 3700X at $299 with the 3700 at $269. (I wouldn't bet on that though lol)

pony-tail 05-25-2019 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defoler (Post 27978400)
I'll wait until the CPU actually releases.
Seems too good to be true.
If the CPU is real, I very much doubt they will price it as mid-low point. And I would expect it to be 2000$ or so. If they get the best of the best, AMD will not be hesitant to put a high price on it.

If you are talking $2000 USD - that is just ridiculous .
They are chasing mind share and market share . It will be competitively priced but I doubt it will be cheap , I doubt that it will be more expensive than the current 16 core Thread Ripper and most likely $100 or so cheaper .
The thing I suspect will affect prices is the amount of Ryzen 2XXX cpus in the channel .
You actually sound like a Shareholder , wishful thinking !

rdr09 05-25-2019 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lexi is Dumb (Post 27978470)
The 1700X launched at $399. The 2700X launched at $329.
If the 8 core chip launches at a higher price than the 2700X did, ill be a little bit disappointed.

The 1700 was $329, with the 2700 following at 299.

I'd love to see the 3700X at $299 with the 3700 at $269. (I wouldn't bet on that though lol)

The 2700X launch price could have been influenced by the intel 9th gen. This time around - what else do we have?

BTW, the i9 9900K still sells for 500$. Based on that, AMD can easily charge the 8-core upwards of 350$.

Lexi is Dumb 05-25-2019 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdr09 (Post 27978482)
The 2700X launch price could have been influenced by the intel 9th gen. This time around - what else do we have?

BTW, the i9 9900K still sells for 500$. Based on that, AMD can easily charge the 8-core upwards of 350$.

Yeah I get that, doesn't mean I can't be a little disappointed at the idea of raised prices. (as a consumer)
Of course on the other hand, if AMD has what they're rumored to have and Intel can get away with selling that 9900k at $500.. AMD should frankly be allowed to get away with $450. Thankfully, I doubt it'll be any more than $350. Don't need prices permanently in Intels favourite position (Over)

Digitalwolf 05-25-2019 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pony-tail (Post 27978480)
If you are talking $2000 USD - that is just ridiculous .
They are chasing mind share and market share . It will be competitively priced but I doubt it will be cheap , I doubt that it will be more expensive than the current 16 core Thread Ripper and most likely $100 or so cheaper .
The thing I suspect will affect prices is the amount of Ryzen 2XXX cpus in the channel .
You actually sound like a Shareholder , wishful thinking !

Yes at $2000 why would anyone buy it. I could buy a 2990WX for less than that....

Right now a 2950X is selling on Amazon for USD $799.99.... so to me that would seem like a reasonable top end price range for the mainstream side. You could also say leaks claim that the price should be lower... maybe it will be. I just don't think an AM4 chip at $800+... Well I guess it depends on if they can swing the HEDT crowd over there and if the lack of quad channel memory would affect what they would be running.

It's not like the 16c/32t chip has to be aimed at the general market. They have plenty of products coming (according to leaks etc).

That said.... I am going to guess that at least with some of these chips. If you don't have a pre-order in and the initial batches sell out. Then just like every other "launch" you will see products listed with stupid prices... maybe even $2000... We've seen both GPU's and CPU's listed at double the msrp after the batches sell out.

pony-tail 05-25-2019 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digitalwolf (Post 27978498)
Yes at $2000 why would anyone buy it. I could buy a 2990WX for less than that....

Right now a 2950X is selling on Amazon for USD $799.99.... so to me that would seem like a reasonable top end price range for the mainstream side. You could also say leaks claim that the price should be lower... maybe it will be. I just don't think an AM4 chip at $800+... Well I guess it depends on if they can swing the HEDT crowd over there and if the lack of quad channel memory would affect what they would be running.

It's not like the 16c/32t chip has to be aimed at the general market. They have plenty of products coming (according to leaks etc).

That said.... I am going to guess that at least with some of these chips. If you don't have a pre-order in and the initial batches sell out. Then just like every other "launch" you will see products listed with stupid prices... maybe even $2000... We've seen both GPU's and CPU's listed at double the msrp after the batches sell out.

If their yields are good I do not think there will be major shortages .
That said I may still wait and see if any gen 3 thread-ripper plans are in the works or if it is toast . because it looks like this arch ( particularly the 16/32 version ) would be best served by the extra resources of the thread ripper or similar platform , That is not to say 16/32 on desktop is going to be in any way bad , I just think that dual channel memory and extra pcie lanes would be beneficial

Particle 05-25-2019 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digitalwolf (Post 27978498)
Yes at $2000 why would anyone buy it. I could buy a 2990WX for less than that....

Right now a 2950X is selling on Amazon for USD $799.99.... so to me that would seem like a reasonable top end price range for the mainstream side. You could also say leaks claim that the price should be lower... maybe it will be. I just don't think an AM4 chip at $800+... Well I guess it depends on if they can swing the HEDT crowd over there and if the lack of quad channel memory would affect what they would be running.

It's not like the 16c/32t chip has to be aimed at the general market. They have plenty of products coming (according to leaks etc).

That said.... I am going to guess that at least with some of these chips. If you don't have a pre-order in and the initial batches sell out. Then just like every other "launch" you will see products listed with stupid prices... maybe even $2000... We've seen both GPU's and CPU's listed at double the msrp after the batches sell out.

800 dollars is not a reasonable price point for mainstream parts. Besides, the AM4 platform is a lot less featureful, so it would be even less reasonable to charge the same price. It has fewer memory channels, it has fewer PCIe lanes, and at a physical level the CPU package and socket are less complex and costly to build.

Digitalwolf 05-25-2019 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Particle (Post 27978610)
800 dollars is not a reasonable price point for mainstream parts. Besides, the AM4 platform is a lot less featureful, so it would be even less reasonable to charge the same price. It has fewer memory channels, it has fewer PCIe lanes, and at a physical level the CPU package and socket are less complex and costly to build.

I was simply showing an example. The performance results leak if real is more than that $799 CPU I used for comparison. Memory channels come down to if you personally really take advantage of them and with PCIE 4.0... I'm not really sure how the lanes work out.

*I* am not paying $800 for an AM4 CPU... ever.

I like the leaked prices... but I'm not sure those are real either.

I've already sold off all my excess parts. I'm definitely doing a build with one of these CPU's. To be quite honest even at one leaked price of around $500 for a 16c/32t part... I would be leaning more towards a 12c/24t part. This is also probably the last build I'm going to do or at least for a long time. So I'll have to see final specs before I make my choice locked in.

Lee Patekar 05-25-2019 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digitalwolf (Post 27978652)
I like the leaked prices... but I'm not sure those are real either.

Not so long ago AMD released an 8 core chip at half the price of intel's 8 core chip.

guttheslayer 05-25-2019 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27978412)
Let's place Bets:
Ryzen 9 3900X/3900 16c/32t -$699/$649
Ryzen 9 3800X/3900 12c/24t -$599/$549
Ryzen 7 3700X/3700 8c/16t -$399/$349

Nah it will most likely be $549, $399 and $279 respectively. It will be R7 and R5 respectively as well.


They will match Intel pricing for 9900K but offer double the amount of cores like what they did in past 2 generations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Patekar (Post 27978722)
Not so long ago AMD released an 8 core chip at half the price of intel's 8 core chip.


This.

doom26464 05-25-2019 10:39 AM

If single core performance can match a 9900k at 5ghz ill bite on a 16core chip.

While the 9900k currently is amazing for fps/frame times in games once you put it under encoding load while gaming on the same pc it does start to sweat a bit.

8 core is nice for encoding/streaming on the same pc but not quite enough for flawless experince. 16 cores might bring that. However nvidia revent software obs improvement to NVENC is really killing the need for x264 encoding

Game streaming reviews I will be watching extremely close.

Hwgeek 05-25-2019 01:19 PM

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/am...sor,39436.html
Like I thought :-), Ryzen 5 3600 will remain 6C :-).

andrews2547 05-25-2019 01:33 PM

AdoredTV is heavily AMD bias and none of his "leaks" have turned out to be true. I'm going to go ahead and say the cinebench score is wrong.

tubers 05-25-2019 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrews2547 (Post 27979022)
AdoredTV is heavily AMD bias and none of his "leaks" have turned out to be true. I'm going to go ahead and say the cinebench score is wrong.

Should've capitalized on the tech rumor channels years ago. Zero accountability. My sources says.. I didn't say cuz.. I won't say cuz.. Decent profit.

andrews2547 05-25-2019 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tubers (Post 27979026)
Should've capitalized on the tech rumor channels years ago. Zero accountability. My sources says.. I didn't say cuz.. I won't say cuz.. Decent profit.


He also does this sort of stuff to build hype for his YouTube channel with the whole "I know something no one else does" thing


https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...24/unknown.png


I really can't believe people fall for this stuff.

Hwgeek 05-25-2019 02:05 PM

We will know all in just 29 hours from now :-),

Imouto 05-25-2019 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrews2547 (Post 27979022)
AdoredTV is heavily AMD bias and none of his "leaks" have turned out to be true. I'm going to go ahead and say the cinebench score is wrong.

Lets not forget his thick Scottish accent. You can't take a guy with that accent seriously. All his videos remind me of this:


ozlay 05-25-2019 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27979016)
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/am...sor,39436.html
Like I thought :-), Ryzen 5 3600 will remain 6C :-).

Maybe to add room for some 4c parts. Which would make the 16c part the 3900 series. That would place it in the X9XXx spot like the 2950x. I think it is actually better that way. especially if they are canceling zen 2 threadripper. And the 3400G was also leaked a while ago. Which is probably a 4c apu. So the 3600 being a 6C sounds more likely. :)

I'd like to see some ultra low powered chips. 15w-25w 4c chips. Probably the 300GE chips.:)

PureBlackFire 05-25-2019 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27978412)
Let's place Bets:
Ryzen 9 3900X/3900 16c/32t -$699/$649
Ryzen 9 3800X/3900 12c/24t -$599/$549
Ryzen 7 3700X/3700 8c/16t -$399/$349

they won't cost this much.

tubers 05-25-2019 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrews2547 (Post 27979038)
He also does this sort of stuff to build hype for his YouTube channel with the whole "I know something no one else does" thing


https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...24/unknown.png


I really can't believe people fall for this stuff.


LOL

Too bad I don't have good diction or even decent writing or I might be doing what they do all day.

You still have superstitious people today so people believing in something "plausible" (depending on your tolerance) would be a given.

Oh well.

Buris 05-25-2019 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmgjet (Post 27977700)
Could call it the 9999XE.

Then they are ready to annouce there 10K series on all new 10NM.

The 10 series won't even be on 10nm, that's what's sad

Redwoodz 05-25-2019 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27978412)
Let's place Bets:
Ryzen 9 3900X/3900 16c/32t -$699/$649
Ryzen 9 3800X/3900 12c/24t -$599/$549
Ryzen 7 3700X/3700 8c/16t -$399/$349


3900X $699
3800X $499
3700X $399
3600X $299
3500X $199

Mahigan 05-25-2019 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imglidinhere (Post 27976978)
Didn't AMD already state that they didn't want to be stuck in the lower-end segments anymore? I mean, call me crazy, but if AMD produces something faster than Intel, they shouldn't have to resort to selling it for cheaper to maintain market share.

If this is true, I wouldn't mind seeing it sold for over $750. If its genuinely that much faster, then why should they hinder their own potential profit making?

TAM: Total Addressable Market

AMD are trying to increase market share in order to be the ones driving the technology. It's not just about having high performance parts but also selling them at a compelling enough price to pull market share away from Intel. AMD want to be the ones creating the SIMD standards and be the optimization standard in the production of Applications/Software/Games etc.

They've only mentioned it during every single conference call and at every single event.

rdr09 05-25-2019 11:03 PM

https://wccftech.com/amd-zen-2-6-cor...n-geekbench-4/

Hwgeek 05-26-2019 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozlay (Post 27979092)
Maybe to add room for some 4c parts. Which would make the 16c part the 3900 series. That would place it in the X9XXx spot like the 2950x. I think it is actually better that way. especially if they are canceling zen 2 threadripper. And the 3400G was also leaked a while ago. Which is probably a 4c apu. So the 3600 being a 6C sounds more likely. :)

I'd like to see some ultra low powered chips. 15w-25w 4c chips. Probably the 300GE chips.:)

IMO this is why we didn't get 2800X- so they can save the 3800X for 12C release.
Regarding 3900X, it's also make sense since the next TR 3000 will can start with 16X 3950X that will be close in performance and more logic naming.

Imouto 05-26-2019 12:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozlay (Post 27979092)
especially if they are canceling zen 2 threadripper.

I think AMD is delaying it to get some goodies like DDR5, PCIE 5.0 or maybe a surprise under the hood like some sort of eDRAM/HBM. It would be pointless to just add more cores as 32 is already overkill for HEDT.

Defoler 05-26-2019 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imouto (Post 27979306)
I think AMD is delaying it to get some goodies like DDR5, PCIE 5.0 or maybe a surprise under the hood like some sort of eDRAM/HBM. It would be pointless to just add more cores as 32 is already overkill for HEDT.

Another option is they are waiting to see if intel respond with anything.
If they have an ace up their sleeve in a new TR, they might drop it on top of intel next time intel release their next small incremental.

Hwgeek 05-26-2019 04:20 AM

Maybe?:
TSMC Starts 7nm+ EUV Volume Production
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ts...000,39434.html

zealord 05-26-2019 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdr09 (Post 27979262)

damn.

HUGE if true

Hwgeek 05-26-2019 04:55 AM

1800X vs this 6c ES:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu...eline=13241660
Can you explain the meaning of those benchmark getting such huge boost?
Lua
SGEMM
SFFT

Took best example of first Zen with Boost clock of 4.0Ghz.

maltamonk 05-26-2019 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdr09 (Post 27979262)

Now that's the stuff I want to know about. I'm not one who gives a flying.......about the high end. VFM!!!

Darkpriest667 05-26-2019 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papant7 (Post 27977370)
It's also the supply chain. The number of AMD suppliers is tiny compared to Intel. As someone who works with big data and needs to expand data centers regularly, AMD simply cannot match the support and availability of Intel. Despite the various vulnerabilities of Intel, Epyc is simply not a viable choice due to suppliers not being able to meet our demands. Also, with Intel, its possible to get a "whole" Intel server. Processor: Intel, Chipset: Intel,NIC: Intel, SSD: Intel, RAM: Samsung (lol). AMD cannot simply do that unfortunately thus bringing Intel's brand in the forefront.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdr09 (Post 27977440)
I agree. Most countries in Africa, for example, get a supply of oem machines from Dell and HP with intel inside. Ask them about amd systems, they don't have a clue. Most of the private and public offices, if not all, only use intel machines. Somehow intel knows not to neglect these places. Intel support exists.


While you folks are right. I work for Dell and we have tons of BIG name customers calling and wanting to swap out or buy AMD based systems because of the MULTIPLE security exploits in the Intel processors. The latest microcode update hit some of the enterprise clients in performance by up to 40%. At that point not only is AMD cheaper, but the performance is better AND it's more secure. AMD doesn't have the supply chain, you all are right, but with the orders we're getting they are going to be able to afford it. We just had to exchange several Poweredges and start building AMD equivalents because high security clients in the Federal side of the business (think Military and Secret Service) are demanding we sell them secure hardware.

Hwgeek 05-26-2019 05:18 AM

This is understandable, since if those customers got Intel based systems last 1~2 years while the AVG upgrade cycle time is ~5 years that can already feel the performance and security hit and can image that until next Upgrade cycle they gonna get even worse so they must find better alternatives as soon as possible.

NightAntilli 05-26-2019 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrews2547 (Post 27979022)
AdoredTV is heavily AMD bias and none of his "leaks" have turned out to be true. I'm going to go ahead and say the cinebench score is wrong.

I guess he didn't talk about chiplets before anyone knew about them.
I guess he didn't say Navi was still GCN.
I guess he didn't say there would be a 12 and 16 core part for Ryzen 3000 on the AM4 platform.

I guess he didn't trash on Vega before it came out.
I guess he didn't just trash on Navi before it comes out.


Most people who have the opinion of him being AMD biased and saying all his leaks are bogus haven't really watched any of this content and simply hate on him for being different.

andrews2547 05-26-2019 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NightAntilli (Post 27979390)
I guess he didn't talk about chiplets before anyone knew about them.
I guess he didn't say Navi was still GCN.
I guess he didn't say there would be a 12 and 16 core part for Ryzen 3000 on the AM4 platform.

I guess he didn't trash on Vega before it came out.
I guess he didn't just trash on Navi before it comes out.


Most people who have the opinion of him being AMD biased and saying all his leaks are bogus haven't really watched any of this content and simply hate on him for being different.


I was talking about his leaks specifically. Not leaks that he has reported on.

Buris 05-26-2019 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrews2547 (Post 27979404)
I was talking about his leaks specifically. Not leaks that he has reported on.


Those were his leaks specifically. He’s right 99% of the time. He’s obviously a fan of AMD but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t report on his leaks impartially.

Shatun-Bear 05-26-2019 07:13 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by andrews2547 (Post 27979404)
I was talking about his leaks specifically. Not leaks that he has reported on.

I think he is full of cr*p. A hardware guy on Resetera has leaked the line-up being revealed tomorrow:

R5 3600- 6C 12T
R5 3600X- 6C 12T
R7 3700- 8C 16T
R7 3700X- 8C 16T
R7 3800X- 12C 24T
-Launch in July
-A few months later you'll get the 3200G and 3400G APU's, which will round off the lower end.
-Those have already been announced (albeit their laptop varients), basic 4c/4t and 4c/8t respectively on 12nm
-Prices all around are quite reasonable, however theyre not the miracle works you've heard before
-3800X is priced lower then the OG 1800X, so you don't have to worry about spending $500
-16C 32T unit isnt coming at launch, or even being revealed.
-Ive heard numerous months for that, but the general consensus is Winter

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ryz...#post-21126183

This guy is reliable.

So it looks like Adored's December hype chart was almost entirely wrong, he got the SKUs wrong, the prices wrong, the APU part was all wrong, and I'm willing to bet that nearly all of the clockspeeds are wrong. Adored was either fed fake info, or made the chart up himself. Whatever the case, he created unrealistic hype that AMD couldn't live up to, especially with those silly prices (which I said at the time were pie in the sky stuff, 7nm 6-core Ryzen for $99?!?!?).

Hwgeek 05-26-2019 07:24 AM

This is what I sad too :-).
Maybe 3900X is saved just in case Intel gonna do another PR stunt like they did before TR 2000 ANN so AMD decided to go upto 32C instead just 24C like planned.

ZealotKi11er 05-26-2019 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shatun-Bear (Post 27979446)
I think he is full of cr*p. A hardware guy on Resetera has leaked the line-up being revealed tomorrow:

R5 3600- 6C 12T
R5 3600X- 6C 12T
R7 3700- 8C 16T
R7 3700X- 8C 16T
R7 3800X- 12C 24T
-Launch in July
-A few months later you'll get the 3200G and 3400G APU's, which will round off the lower end.
-Those have already been announced (albeit their laptop varients), basic 4c/4t and 4c/8t respectively on 12nm
-Prices all around are quite reasonable, however theyre not the miracle works you've heard before
-3800X is priced lower then the OG 1800X, so you don't have to worry about spending $500
-16C 32T unit isnt coming at launch, or even being revealed.
-Ive heard numerous months for that, but the general consensus is Winter

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ryz...#post-21126183

This guy is reliable.

So it looks like Adored's December hype chart was almost entirely wrong, he got the SKUs wrong, the prices wrong, the APU part was all wrong, and I'm willing to bet that nearly all of the clockspeeds are wrong. Adored was either fed fake info, or made the chart up himself. Whatever the case, he created unrealistic hype that AMD couldn't live up to, especially with those silly prices (which I said at the time were pie in the sky stuff, 7nm 6-core Ryzen for $99?!?!?).

Those seem more reasonable. Also, a good idea for AMD not to release 16c part. They can save that for later. Also, 12c will beat anything Intel has.

Hwgeek 05-26-2019 07:35 AM

looks like even 8C will, so Every one will be happy(except 9900K owners).
I wonder what about the OC headroom on the cheap 6C parts, if you can get over 25% performance boost they gonna be best VFM/OC friendly CPU that many will buy.
Also this year AIO coolers gonna be even more popular.

Buris 05-26-2019 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shatun-Bear (Post 27979446)
I think he is full of cr*p. A hardware guy on Resetera has leaked the line-up being revealed tomorrow:

R5 3600- 6C 12T
R5 3600X- 6C 12T
R7 3700- 8C 16T
R7 3700X- 8C 16T
R7 3800X- 12C 24T
-Launch in July
-A few months later you'll get the 3200G and 3400G APU's, which will round off the lower end.
-Those have already been announced (albeit their laptop varients), basic 4c/4t and 4c/8t respectively on 12nm
-Prices all around are quite reasonable, however theyre not the miracle works you've heard before
-3800X is priced lower then the OG 1800X, so you don't have to worry about spending $500
-16C 32T unit isnt coming at launch, or even being revealed.
-Ive heard numerous months for that, but the general consensus is Winter

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ryz...#post-21126183

This guy is reliable.

So it looks like Adored's December hype chart was almost entirely wrong, he got the SKUs wrong, the prices wrong, the APU part was all wrong, and I'm willing to bet that nearly all of the clockspeeds are wrong. Adored was either fed fake info, or made the chart up himself. Whatever the case, he created unrealistic hype that AMD couldn't live up to, especially with those silly prices (which I said at the time were pie in the sky stuff, 7nm 6-core Ryzen for $99?!?!?).


You're cherry picking things that aren't even out yet.

Adored specifically said prices are obviously subject to change, especially with the tarrif issues that have been plagueing the world as of the last 6 months, after his video posted.

The SKUs aren't proven wrong, as they haven't even been announced.

As per announcement? Was Zen 2 announced at CES? Yes, yes it was. So you're 0/3 so far on disproving anything. Even when he suspects something to be subject to change or fishy, he'll say that outright.

You're really pulling your hair out trying to disprove his leaks, and even then, he's still overall correct.

Remember, at the time, Zen 2 was thought to be a monolithic die with 8c/16t by the mainstream tech press. Reporting on something that early comes with all the caveats that things are subject to change, which he of course wrote about.

Raghar 05-26-2019 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shatun-Bear (Post 27979446)
I think he is full of cr*p. A hardware guy on Resetera has leaked the line-up being revealed tomorrow:

R5 3600- 6C 12T
R5 3600X- 6C 12T
R7 3700- 8C 16T
R7 3700X- 8C 16T
R7 3800X- 12C 24T
-Launch in July

This looks like 6-core based chip, two chips connected by intermediate. 8C is salvage 4+4. 12C is full chip for full price (look carefully, it doesn't have non X version).

WannaBeOCer 05-26-2019 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buris (Post 27979466)
Remember, at the time, Zen 2 was thought to be a monolithic die with 8c/16t by the mainstream tech press. Reporting on something that early comes with all the caveats that things are subject to change, which he of course wrote about.

Ryzen and Epyc use 8 core monolithic dies with 2 CCX per die.

Buris 05-26-2019 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raghar (Post 27979472)
This looks like 6-core based chip, two chips connected by intermediate. 8C is salvage 4+4. 12C is full chip for full price (look carefully, it doesn't have non X version).

Theory falls apart when you realize 16c parts have already been sent in, tested, leaked, posted, etc.

I think the 6c SKUs will be 129-169$, 8c SKUs will be around 199-299$, 12c SKUs 350-450$, 16c SKUs 500-650$.

Either way, we'll find out in approximately 12 hours.

ozlay 05-26-2019 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imouto (Post 27979306)
I think AMD is delaying it to get some goodies like DDR5, PCIE 5.0 or maybe a surprise under the hood like some sort of eDRAM/HBM. It would be pointless to just add more cores as 32 is already overkill for HEDT.

Or it could be a supply issue. Not enough chiplets to have both EYPC and Threadripper? However Threadripper was late last year. So maybe it got pushed back until next year 7nm+?

Buris 05-26-2019 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozlay (Post 27979512)
Or it could be a supply issue. Not enough chiplets to have both EYPC and Threadripper? However Threadripper was late last year. So maybe it got pushed back until next year 7nm+?

I would assume so. Ryzen 9's are going to go for 500-600$ at a minimum, and consist of 2 chiplets and an IO die.

Threadripper would only be slightly better from a profit standpoint, and use up 4 chiplets. Meanwhile, Epyc is going to cost serious money, so the cost per chiplet is great for AMD in the server market.

Plus, overall market adoption of TR is relatively low. They want either market share or money, TR needs a break.

Darkpriest667 05-26-2019 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozlay (Post 27979512)
Or it could be a supply issue. Not enough chiplets to have both EYPC and Threadripper? However Threadripper was late last year. So maybe it got pushed back until next year 7nm+?


Since EPYC is for Enterprise and Enterprise is where the money is EPYC will get priority in production. If they didn't do that they are stupid and deserve to fail as a company. I openly admit I thought 3 years ago AMD should cash it in and sell to Samsung or someone else. I was wrong. If they can start snagging Enterprise business away from Intel because of the gaffs in the security on Intel chips they are going to be in position to take some serious market share away.

Shatun-Bear 05-26-2019 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buris (Post 27979466)
You're cherry picking things that aren't even out yet.

Adored specifically said prices are obviously subject to change, especially with the tarrif issues that have been plagueing the world as of the last 6 months, after his video posted.

The SKUs aren't proven wrong, as they haven't even been announced.

As per announcement? Was Zen 2 announced at CES? Yes, yes it was. So you're 0/3 so far on disproving anything. Even when he suspects something to be subject to change or fishy, he'll say that outright.

You're really pulling your hair out trying to disprove his leaks, and even then, he's still overall correct.

Remember, at the time, Zen 2 was thought to be a monolithic die with 8c/16t by the mainstream tech press. Reporting on something that early comes with all the caveats that things are subject to change, which he of course wrote about.

No, I'll repeat this and we can come back to it when all is revealed and you can decide if you still want to be his fangirl:

- The prices will be wrong
- The base/boost clocks will be almost entirely wrong
- The SKUs will be nearly all wrong
- The Ryzen 3000 APU info was all wrong (G APUs are 12nm+only for this year).
- The info on Navi will be wrong

So in summary, you say he's 'overrall correct', which is stupid because A: No he isn't and B: the things he might be right about are things anyone could have guessed. For example, 'wow, he guessed there would be a 12-core and 16-core', but we saw with ROME that they doubled cores on 7nm so that was an educated guess. His made-up specs, for example, 4.3Ghz base clock on the 16-core SKU, was anything but educated, it was so dumb I immediately knew his 'leak' was total bull*****.

Buris 05-26-2019 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shatun-Bear (Post 27979632)
No, I'll repeat this and we can come back to it when all is revealed and you can decide if you still want to be his fangirl:

- The prices will be wrong
- The base/boost clocks will be almost entirely wrong
- The SKUs will be nearly all wrong
- The Ryzen 3000 APU info was all wrong (G APUs are 12nm+only for this year).
- The info on Navi will be wrong

So in summary, you say he's 'overrall correct', which is stupid because A: No he isn't and B: the things he might be right about are things anyone could have guessed. For example, 'wow, he guessed there would be a 12-core and 16-core', but we saw with ROME that they doubled cores on 7nm so that was an educated guess. His made-up specs, for example, 4.3Ghz base clock on the 16-core SKU, was anything but educated, it was so dumb I immediately knew his 'leak' was total bull*****.

Again, I haven't specified I think he's right, but your willingness to assume he's wrong is far more telling of your mental instability.. Sorry to say but you've lost it.

Buris 05-26-2019 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buris (Post 27979634)
Again, I haven't specified I think he's right, but your willingness to assume he's wrong is far more telling of your mental instability.. Sorry to say but you've lost it.

Keep in mind, The actualy computex announcement is in less than 10 hours, so If you would have just kept quiet you wouldn't have been seen as someone who's entirely gullible / disingenuous.

You can't claim someone is wrong before you have any facts to the contrary, likewise, we shouldn't have assumed anyone's leak to be 100% correct, as Adored has said time and time again that these are TBA and TBC.

ozlay 05-26-2019 06:29 PM

Well the R7-3700x is a 65w 8c/16t chip.

Mahigan 05-26-2019 08:31 PM

$499

I told you. TAM... AMD is all about the TAM.

As for the 16c part... that's on the way later on.

Gunderman456 05-26-2019 08:33 PM

AMD at Computex Ryzen 9 3900X 12 Core/24 Threads $499US and it was faster then the Intel i9 9920X 12 Core equivalent at less then half the price with a 4.6GB boost. Available July 7th. No mention of a 16 core CPU.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.