Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As far as i think this is possible there will be 8 chiplets on TR4. All the Numa and other problems of that kind will be adressed by the i/o chip that is unique to the TR4. There will be 3 kind of I/O chiplets, all in 14nm made at Glofo or Samsung, 1 kind of CPU chiplet in 7 nm made at TSMC.In conjunction meaning when they release next gen tr, they may also add the 2nd chiplet to ryzen. A staggered launch, hit intel with the 8c/16t parts first at half their pricing, then roll out 16c/32t am4 and 64c/128t tr4 in the fall when intel release their 10th gen core parts.
No need to wait, Su basically confirmed it.
That's why AMD moved to chiplet design. The die sizes are much smaller without the IO and other ancillary poorly scaling circuitry. This is how AMD can keep yields very high, and costs relatively low.
That's why AMD moved to chiplet design. The die sizes are much smaller without the IO and other ancillary poorly scaling circuitry. This is how AMD can keep yields very high, and costs relatively low.
If Intel didn't move to a chiplet design, they can't compete with AMD on price (or yield) anytime soon. And AMD can drop prices even lower if need be.
AMD's entire lineup is perfectly suited to the prices they have set. Get a chiplet with 1 or 2 malfunctioning cores? Lower bin, lower price, but still sold to consumer. Win-Win.
AMD has knocked the Zen design out of the park, and the ball is still flying.
AMD will not increase prices in any meaningful way. 2 main reasons.
1. Customers will cry foul and all the goodwill AMD has built up the past 2 CPU generations are gone in an instant.
2. If AMD increases price to Intel level, AMD is killing any CPU marketshare growth right then and there. AMD needs to be cheaper to wrestle marketshare and keep sales high. Buyers are emotional buyers and buy things based on feeling. We all now feel that AMD is right on point with performance and price. They'll move prices by US$ 10-30 SKU to SKU. Eg. a 2700X launched at US$329 (now cheaper) will be priced similarly with the 3700X equivalent (naming TBA) - maybe a few dollars more or less.
Finally, the maximum price AMD will charge for the rumored Ryzen 9 3800 series will be US$ 499 (with a lower binned R9 at US$50-75 less). Same as the launch price of the Ryzen 7 1800x...
There is nothing to suggest AMD will increase prices at all SKU to new gen SKU. Stop thinking Intel price raping, and start thinking reasonable.
The correct business move is to charge the highest price possible for a product.
Wrong. Even ignoring goodwill, install base, and other intangibles which certainly aren't nothing, the correct business move is to find the price value that maximises profit when accounting for volume at each price point.
Enthusiasts always go for the best performance/price ratio. Obviously. That's AMD by a long shot right now.I can't help but disagree with this reasoning. Customer goodwill isn't worth a lot of money in this industry. Basically everyone chases the best deal in CPUs. Most customers will switch Intel/AMD in a heartbeat if it gives them a better setup relative to their needs for the price.
I bet Intel and AMD have very similar internal models for CPU demand. Both companies have been at this for a long time. If AMD has a product that is similar to Intel's, I expect them to immediately raise prices to a similar level; with maybe a slight discount because they are not the market leader and have a bit weaker ecosystem.
The correct business move is to charge the highest price possible for a product. Otherwise you are leaving profits on the table. The only constraints are competition, substitutes, and the ability of customers to delay buying.
Follow the CPU names.I suspect 12 and 16 core AM4 Zen2 products will be priced higher than the 2700X was at launch.
The correct business move is to charge the highest price possible for a product. Otherwise you are leaving profits on the table. The only constraints are competition, substitutes, and the ability of customers to delay buying.
Follow the CPU names.
1600 -> 2600 -> 3600, same price bracket
1700 -> 2700 -> 3700, same price bracket
1800 -> (no 2800) -> 3800, same price bracket
And the same way for all other SKU's...
Point is, if Adored's leak was bullshit, then the provided tabulation may also be wrong.
In other words, the 8 core Zen 2 part may be a 3700
The 12 core a 3800
The 16 core a 3850 or 3900 or something.
So we don't know the pricing structure yet.
What part of his leak/deduction has been incorrect so far in regards to Zen2?Point is, if Adored's leak was bullshit, then the provided tabulation may also be wrong.
In other words, the 8 core Zen 2 part may be a 3700
The 12 core a 3800
The 16 core a 3850 or 3900 or something.
So we don't know the pricing structure yet.
Calavaro Digital Viper-X-
Before we go too far into that rabbit hole, you should know Kyle is getting tired of the specific argument wrt adoredtv
AMD doesn't have to sell their CPU's at Intel prices. Intel has to sell their CPU's at AMD's prices, and that is going to hurt Intel hugely.
AMD will go for the price/performance sweet spot.
Not, it should be noted, because they feel generous toward us, but because at the same value, most people will go Intel. In all things, AMD must undercut and win the price/performance comparison. GPUs, CPUs... everything.
At least until they recover the goodwill they lost with Bulldozer and ceding the high end GPU market to Nvidia. That will take awhile, the brand damage was very extensive. If this were any other market, AMD would probably be gone entirely. Fortunately for them, the tech world's memory is much shorter than with many others. A couple generations of seriously competitive products will bring them back - maybe eventually to the point where they can charge similar prices as opposed to significant undercutting.
Almost no one remembers Bulldozer as a thing unless their into tech sites...
I think AMD will try do their best at cashing in where possible, it is a business and a business needs cashflow as much as mindshare. If the performance is epyc then people will pay.
This right here, there is zero reason for AMD to try & match Intel pricing...
There are two very important reason: physics and economy.
Physics: Cost is a nonlinear function of performance. E.g. uncreasing IPC by 10% doesn't cost 10% more.
Economy: Zen1 used single die, weaker architecture than Zen2, 128bit units/datapaths, and cheaper node. Zen2 uses multipackage die, stronger architecture than Zen2, 256bit units/datapaths, and a much more expensive node.
There are two very important reason: physics and economy.
Physics: Cost is a nonlinear function of performance. E.g. uncreasing IPC by 10% doesn't cost 10% more.
Economy: Zen1 used single die, weaker architecture than Zen2, 128bit units/datapaths, and cheaper node. Zen2 uses multipackage die, stronger architecture than Zen2, 256bit units/datapaths, and a much more expensive node.
I wonder about the cost differences involved in separating the uncore I/O from the cores. Will this mitigate some of the cost increases involved with 7nm, or exacerbate them?
One thing that is interesting is it may allow for more salvaging. Dies with bad I/O had to be thrown out in most cases before (though how many is that, really?) even if the cores were good. I think the multi-chip model allows for more die salvaging, thusly. But packaging costs have surely risen as a result of this. And 7nm isn't cheap...
AMD will not increase prices in any meaningful way. 2 main reasons.
1. Customers will cry foul and all the goodwill AMD has built up the past 2 CPU generations are gone in an instant.
2. If AMD increases price to Intel level, AMD is killing any CPU marketshare growth right then and there. AMD needs to be cheaper to wrestle marketshare and keep sales high. Buyers are emotional buyers and buy things based on feeling. We all now feel that AMD is right on point with performance and price. They'll move prices by US$ 10-30 SKU to SKU. Eg. a 2700X launched at US$329 (now cheaper) will be priced similarly with the 3700X equivalent (naming TBA) - maybe a few dollars more or less.
Finally, the maximum price AMD will charge for the rumored Ryzen 9 3800 series will be US$ 499 (with a lower binned R9 at US$50-75 less). Same as the launch price of the Ryzen 7 1800x...
There is nothing to suggest AMD will increase prices at all SKU to new gen SKU. Stop thinking Intel price raping, and start thinking reasonable.
I suspect 12 and 16 core AM4 Zen2 products will be priced higher than the 2700X was at launch.
Enthusiasts always go for the best performance/price ratio. Obviously. That's AMD by a long shot right now.
Joe Consumer goes with what the retailer recommends. In the past that meant nearly 100% Intel since the Intel illegal kickbacks paid very well, Joe Consumer got screwed on price, and AMD was nowhere to be seen in the retail channels. Slowly changing now, but not quick enough.
But where it really counts - corporate bulk purchases - is where the huge suppliers of prebuilt computers (HP, Dell, Lenovo et al) make your decision. "Nobody ever got fired for buying Intel" was the old, very wrong, slogan perpetuated by Intel. So buyers go the Intel servers, and since they worked the best, throw in the 30,000 PC's with Intel CPU's in them. This is where AMD now is wrestling away sales. Sell hugely powerful server systems, at deeply discounted prices, and the corporate desktop purchases follow. The price delta is even bigger in the server market than the consumer market.
The price strategy from AMD is brilliant. Sell the CPU's with enough margin to make the company and investors happy, but low enough that Intel can not sell their CPU's at any lower prices without cutting their obscene margins by an order of magnitude and perhaps enter a territory of selling at a loss. Intel is in real, actual, bonafide trouble, and we all know it.
AMD doesn't have to sell their CPU's at Intel prices. Intel has to sell their CPU's at AMD's prices, and that is going to hurt Intel hugely.
Follow the CPU names.
1600 -> 2600 -> 3600, same price bracket
1700 -> 2700 -> 3700, same price bracket
1800 -> (no 2800) -> 3800, same price bracket
And the same way for all other SKU's...
Point is, if Adored's leak was bullshit, then the provided tabulation may also be wrong.
In other words, the 8 core Zen 2 part may be a 3700
The 12 core a 3800
The 16 core a 3850 or 3900 or something.
So we don't know the pricing structure yet.
What part of his leak/deduction has been incorrect so far in regards to Zen2?
He may have some details wrong, but thats to be expected since AMD themselves are not finished with the fine tuning of them.
But everything so far clearly points to 12 and 16 core SKUs being released. And following pricing logic, the prices should land very near the deduced prices.
AMD will go for the price/performance sweet spot.
Not, it should be noted, because they feel generous toward us, but because at the same value, most people will go Intel. In all things, AMD must undercut and win the price/performance comparison. GPUs, CPUs... everything.
At least until they recover the goodwill they lost with Bulldozer and ceding the high end GPU market to Nvidia. That will take awhile, the brand damage was very extensive. If this were any other market, AMD would probably be gone entirely. Fortunately for them, the tech world's memory is much shorter than with many others. A couple generations of seriously competitive products will bring them back - maybe eventually to the point where they can charge similar prices as opposed to significant undercutting.
He has been pretty spot with regards to Zen 2 leaks so far.
Those who say AMD prices will increase. Just look at how AMD's prices have decreased over the life of their CPU's.
Don't need that jump in performance? Grab the previous gen at half price (or so), and keep most of the performance.
The brilliant, fantastic thing that allows for this is the drop-in CPU support. Grab an inexpensive B-series mainboard, and a 1700X if you want cheap, very good performance right this minute. Then a few months later grab the 3700 (or whatever) for a cheap CPU speed upgrade.
No more having to rebuild an entire system for expensive money, when you need a little bit more CPU speed. The value buyer in me loves this idea.
And that's what AMD is - the value buy. AMD knows they are and thus will not move their CPU prices generation to generation (SKU-to-SKU).
6C/12T Ryzen 5 2600/X -> 6C/12T Ryzen 5 3600/X*
8C/16T Ryzen 7 2700/X -> 8C/12T Ryzen 7 3700/X*
none -> 12C/24T Ryzen 9 3800/X*
none -> 16C/32T Ryzen 9 3900/X*
6C/12T Ryzen 5 2600/X -> 6C/12T Ryzen 5 3600/X*
8C/16T Ryzen 7 2700/X -> 8C/12T Ryzen 7 3700/X*
none -> 12C/24T Ryzen 9 3800/X*
none -> 16C/32T Ryzen 9 3900/X*
8C/16T Ryzen 7 2700/X -> 8C/12T Ryzen 7 3700/X
You got some of your thread counts wrong...
Ryzen 3 = 6C/12T
Ryzen 5 = 8C/16T
Ryzen 7 = 12C/24T
Ryzen 9 = 16C/32T
Top end Ryzen 9 will be 500 bucks...
Intel is fucked for the next year or two...
No, I didn't.
Yes, you did...
The parts I highlighted in red, you are attributing 12 threads to 8 core systems...
Meaning, you got your thread counts wrong...
Your misnaming of the four (4) tiers of CPUS & cash grab pricing scheme is another issue all together...
AMD needs to keep at their lower pricing to grab market share, not jack up prices just because the other guy charges more...
Ryzen 3 = 6C/12T - $150
Ryzen 5 = 8C/16T - $250
Ryzen 7 = 12C/24T - $350
Ryzen 9 = 16C/32T - $500
With AMD sticking to their current pricing & reasonably priced mid-range Navi GPUs in the pipe, AMD should be able to get a good bit of market share from Intel & Nvidia...
Lisa Su said there was room that could fit another chiplet - but that doesn't mean AMD was going to do it right at the get go.
I'm guessing AMD won't even go higher than 8 cores on the AM4 UNTIL Intel shows their next hand. If the performance on 8 cores can beat a 9900K on less power for less $ what's the point? The only person you're competing with is your own TR product line.
AMD is likely to put out just enough cores and threads to put heat on Intel at a good price point first then maybe do a 'Tick Tock' strategy and do Ryzen 2 / Gen 3 Plus model next year (AMD what's up with the confusing nomenclature?).
8 × 2 = 16, not 12. I don't think amd is going to release a gimped smt part like that. Otoh, I don't think the typo is that big a deal. Point it out and then stfu.It wasn't a mistake and didn't need correcting.
It's not a typo.