AMD Delays 3950X Launch, says TR3 is coming...

nEo717

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
343
AMD previously told us that it's long-awaited Ryzen 9 3950X, a 16-core 32-thread behemoth destined for the mainstream desktop, would arrive in September 2019, but today the company announced it is delaying the release for unspecified reasons until November.

The company did throw us a bone, though, and also announced for the first time that the third-generation Threadripper processors would also release next month, though the graphic clearly states that it will debut with 24 cores instead of the expected 32, or even 64 cores.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-delay-launch-third-gen-threadripper,40442.html
 

Brian_B

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
3,356
Probably has to do with the lack of capacity. Still supply issues with the 3900X
 
  • Like
Reactions: sethk
like this

gigaxtreme1

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
3,527
I doubt it is Fab capacity as it is high demand and spinning out lower binned dies to increase yields as the up binned dies are cherrypicked for the higher margin parts.
 

nEo717

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
343
Do you guys think its AMD holding back to see what Intel launches... perhaps sets the ground work for pricing of next Threadrippers along with gives AMD a bit longer to firm things up to get the max performance out of 3950X?

Lisa Su in my opinion plays a better game than all past AMD leaders - I'm sure yields/binning plays a role for the best parts too in order to meet demand (which makes me wonder if their server parts aren't selling better than they thought too).
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,234
Do you guys think its AMD holding back to see what Intel launches... perhaps sets the ground work for pricing of next Threadrippers along with gives AMD a bit longer to firm things up to get the max performance out of 3950X?

Lisa Su in my opinion plays a better game than all past AMD leaders - I'm sure yields/binning plays a role for the best parts too in order to meet demand (which makes me wonder if their server parts aren't selling better than they thought too).
No, I think Dan nailed it. Getting enough high end binned parts, either from accumulating a stockpile over time, or waiting for the process to a mature a bit more to produce a higher proportion of top parts (or some combo of both).
 

gigaxtreme1

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
3,527
This is most likely a problem getting enough quality binned chiplets to meet the demands of the 3900X and 3950X parts.
Shouldn't have a problem getting six out of 8 cores for the 3900x models. Epic is on a tear too. I think it's demand.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
I think it has to do with EPYC. Those orders are likely going to be filled first before consumers. I am sure they are going to save some for consumers and release them in chunks as time goes on. The reason they are starting with threadripper with 24 core model.
 

Organik

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
85
AMD previously told us that it's long-awaited Ryzen 9 3950X, a 16-core 32-thread behemoth destined for the mainstream desktop, would arrive in September 2019, but today the company announced it is delaying the release for unspecified reasons until November.

The company did throw us a bone, though, and also announced for the first time that the third-generation Threadripper processors would also release next month, though the graphic clearly states that it will debut with 24 cores instead of the expected 32, or even 64 cores.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-delay-launch-third-gen-threadripper,40442.html
Wait a month no biggie. or month and half and shit.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
55,786
Shouldn't have a problem getting six out of 8 cores for the 3900x models. Epic is on a tear too. I think it's demand.
Given that many of these Ryzen 3000 cores can't do 4.2GHz, I'd say getting these things binned is a bit of a problem. Even if it really isn't, the issue comes down to demand for Epyc and Ryzen CPU's.
 

Algrim

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
1,683
I was hoping they'd have a 12c/24t Threadripper but starting at 24c/48t? Now I'm intrigued. (y)
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
I was hoping they'd have a 12c/24t Threadripper but starting at 24c/48t? Now I'm intrigued. (y)
That won't make much sense when zen 2 consumer series already tops out at 16 threads.
 

Rvenger

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
2,009
I think it has to do with EPYC. Those orders are likely going to be filled first before consumers. I am sure they are going to save some for consumers and release them in chunks as time goes on. The reason they are starting with threadripper with 24 core model.

Yes, exactly. Customers moving data centers over to a faster, cheaper more secure platform is really taking a toll on ZEN 2 chips. Hence the low core TR chip being announced. They are saving all the good dies for Epyc. At the same time, the yields are probably not great.
 

Algrim

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
1,683
That won't make much sense when zen 2 consumer series already tops out at 16 threads.
I'm looking at TR not for the cores (I already have 2 12c/24t and one 16c/32t workstations) but for the I/O bandwidth.
 

Jandor

Gawd
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
533
I was hoping they'd have a 12c/24t Threadripper but starting at 24c/48t? Now I'm intrigued. (y)
That is already common knowledge leak.
24c/48t and 32c/64t on TRX40 chipset with 4 channel RAM, and 48c/96t and 64c/128t on TRX 80 and WRX 80 chipset with 8 channel RAM (like Epyc Line).

What is weird is that the 3950X is using 8c/16t chiplets just as 3700X and 3800X do.
Maybe the problem is actually that the 3950X cannot hold the announced performance and keep the 105W TDP.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
I'm looking at TR not for the cores (I already have 2 12c/24t and one 16c/32t workstations) but for the I/O bandwidth.
I get it but amd is not going to make it because it won't sell much because of other processors being available up to 16 cores. I mean x570 is already damn good with bandwidth and IO. There is not much value proposition there. They wont price a new thread ripper below ryzen with a 12 core.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
That is already common knowledge leak.
24c/48t and 32c/64t on TRX40 chipset with 4 channel RAM, and 48c/96t and 64c/128t on TRX 80 and WRX 80 chipset with 8 channel RAM (like Epyc Line).

What is weird is that the 3950X is using 8c/16t chiplets just as 3700X and 3800X do.
Maybe the problem is actually that the 3950X cannot hold the announced performance and keep the 105W TDP.
No that is not the problem. Keeping a processor under TDP is not rocket science. Look at the base clock, its already lower than 3900x. all they have to do is manage the thing.

That is the least of issues. The real issue is demand and EPYC being priority.
 

LurkerLito

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
2,172
Wait so the TR3 chips need a new MB? I thought they'd still use the same socket and I could just drop in the new TR3 chip into my rig.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
Wait so the TR3 chips need a new MB? I thought they'd still use the same socket and I could just drop in the new TR3 chip into my rig.
I think they will unless you want better memory support where most people will go for new board.
 

KATEKATEKATE

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
314
sounds like a double whammy of big Epyc demand and binning issues. Judging by how many folks have Zen 2 chips that can barely hit 4500 or even 4300, I'm not surprised to hear the 4700Mhz part has been delayed. I agree it's nothing to do with TDP- from my testing and what I've seen around, Zen 2 doesn't seem like Zen 1 (or Bulldozer, or most CPUs) where one had the option of pushing the power way way way up to reach for that last 5-10% clock. Zen 2 simply hits a wall before that point on the curve. No amount of power will push clocks higher- its just up to how well TMSC's fabs do with AMDs design and so far they haven't been doing stellar and AMD may have been overly-ambitious with their advertised clocks and now they have to live with it.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
sounds like a double whammy of big Epyc demand and binning issues. Judging by how many folks have Zen 2 chips that can barely hit 4500 or even 4300, I'm not surprised to hear the 4700Mhz part has been delayed. I agree it's nothing to do with TDP- from my testing and what I've seen around, Zen 2 doesn't seem like Zen 1 (or Bulldozer, or most CPUs) where one had the option of pushing the power way way way up to reach for that last 5-10% clock. Zen 2 simply hits a wall before that point on the curve. No amount of power will push clocks higher- its just up to how well TMSC's fabs do with AMDs design and so far they haven't been doing stellar and AMD may have been overly-ambitious with their advertised clocks and now they have to live with it.
not sure what the issue is with clock speeds once again. I am hitting 4625 with my 3900x after latest bios update under light loads and sustained 4500+ average on cinebench single core. Atleast one core is 4500+ at any given time during the test. It boosts 4250-4475 and even spikes to 4500 under games after ABBA update. before it was locked to 4200. How is that bad though that is well 400+ above base clock in games. Cinebench all core is 4100+ mostly between 4150-4200.

So 3950x is obviously going to be higher binned chip and I don't know how many they expect to sell. But I think they will probably be just fine. The issue probably is epyc demand and more then expected demand AMD is seeing for zen 2 chips. We all know they are binning this so its obvious 3950x are going to be top binned and will likely have lower supply. But AMD probably expects more so they are likely building inventory at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

clockdogg

Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
1,014
Epyc is taking priority, for sure according to our internal communications.
You've been having 'internal communications' with AMD? Is this some sort of kinky nerd thing...or can I talk to you about 3900X-whispering for me? ;-)
 

TheRookie

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
173
I doubt it is Fab capacity as it is high demand and spinning out lower binned dies to increase yields as the up binned dies are cherrypicked for the higher margin parts.
This is most likely a problem getting enough quality binned chiplets to meet the demands of the 3900X and 3950X parts.
No, I think Dan nailed it. Getting enough high end binned parts, either from accumulating a stockpile over time, or waiting for the process to a mature a bit more to produce a higher proportion of top parts (or some combo of both).
Given that many of these Ryzen 3000 cores can't do 4.2GHz, I'd say getting these things binned is a bit of a problem. Even if it really isn't, the issue comes down to demand for Epyc and Ryzen CPU's.
sounds like a double whammy of big Epyc demand and binning issues. Judging by how many folks have Zen 2 chips that can barely hit 4500 or even 4300, I'm not surprised to hear the 4700Mhz part has been delayed. I agree it's nothing to do with TDP- from my testing and what I've seen around, Zen 2 doesn't seem like Zen 1 (or Bulldozer, or most CPUs) where one had the option of pushing the power way way way up to reach for that last 5-10% clock. Zen 2 simply hits a wall before that point on the curve. No amount of power will push clocks higher- its just up to how well TMSC's fabs do with AMDs design and so far they haven't been doing stellar and AMD may have been overly-ambitious with their advertised clocks and now they have to live with it.
I am surprised AMD hasn't launched Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen 3950 in the meanwhile.

These could use lower binned chipets used in the Ryzen 5 3600 and Ryzen 7 3700X, respectively.

They could be discontinued later when Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 3950X are available in ample quantity.
 

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
8,374
My guess is the thermals of the 3900x are already so prohibitive that packing 4 more cores into the same die space and CPU space is just going to be asking too much.

So maybe AMD decided to just keep 16 within HEDT space for obvious reasons. The power of the 3900x is such that it is much faster task to task than my old 2950x. I could only imagine that I am skipping this TR generation to wait for 4th.
 

mnewxcv

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
6,669
Title made me think a new socket was coming out. Glad that's not the case.
 

Mav451

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
4,596
+7% perf or 10% reduction in power sounds good to me. How long would it take for that to reach the end-user? 6-9 months? 1 to 2 years?
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
+7% perf or 10% reduction in power sounds good to me. How long would it take for that to reach the end-user? 6-9 months? 1 to 2 years?
from what I read it was 15% reduction in power or +10% performance at same power for 7nm+. It’s supposed to be next year for zen 3 and Navi 2
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
My guess is the thermals of the 3900x are already so prohibitive that packing 4 more cores into the same die space and CPU space is just going to be asking too much.

So maybe AMD decided to just keep 16 within HEDT space for obvious reasons. The power of the 3900x is such that it is much faster task to task than my old 2950x. I could only imagine that I am skipping this TR generation to wait for 4th.
you think they are delaying it because of thermals when they are making 64 core chips? It’s just 2 chiplets. At stock you are not going to see any thermal problems out of the box. Overclocking might be different story. What happened is EPYC! Plain and simple, that’s why you are seeing threadripper starting with one 24 core chip and rest later.
 

gigaxtreme1

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
3,527
+7% perf or 10% reduction in power sounds good to me. How long would it take for that to reach the end-user? 6-9 months? 1 to 2 years?
Since the process improvement was already available at the end of July, time for the decision to be made, employing the EOL enhancements and 2 months for production, November sounds about right.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,639
No, I think Dan nailed it. Getting enough high end binned parts, either from accumulating a stockpile over time, or waiting for the process to a mature a bit more to produce a higher proportion of top parts (or some combo of both).
It has already been announced that TSMC are having turn around times increase on their 7nm process parts, primarily because of demand. This is not new news, although I appreciate the OP letting us know about the 3950x delays.
 

RamonGTP

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
7,895
Looks like AMD is trying to figure out how to get that split second boost of 4.7GHz since they can't seem to even get 4.6GHz on the 3900x in most cases. This news makes me glad I didn't wait around for the 3950x
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
Looks like AMD is trying to figure out how to get that split second boost of 4.7GHz since they can't seem to even get 4.6GHz on the 3900x in most cases. This news makes me glad I didn't wait around for the 3950x
I am hitting 4600+ after latest bios update and 4500-4600 on cinebench single thread. All core boost during games is also improved.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,807
Since the process improvement was already available at the end of July, time for the decision to be made, employing the EOL enhancements and 2 months for production, November sounds about right.
I am pretty sure he was referring to 7nm+. Which is next year.
 

gigaxtreme1

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
3,527
Mav451 was referring to the content of the article posted involving process improvement. While NKD was talking about next year's 7nm+ improvement. The subject is on the current node and I believe 3950x and Threadripper.

Edit. And I believe TSMC talked about lead times being extended, not turn around times.
In other words, new customers have to wait. TSMC is booked out for months on 7nm.

Edit 2. My thesis is that the delay is a transition to a new stepping.
 
Last edited:

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
8,374
you think they are delaying it because of thermals when they are making 64 core chips? It’s just 2 chiplets. At stock you are not going to see any thermal problems out of the box. Overclocking might be different story. What happened is EPYC! Plain and simple, that’s why you are seeing threadripper starting with one 24 core chip and rest later.
Thermals on tiny amr package. Not huge TR socket.
 
Top