• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.

AMD launches Zen+ 12nm Ryzen and X470 motherboards

jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
jeg-empty.png
I believe this is the source of the edit, there are just way to many signs pointing to a shopped image.

price-list-1-600x650.png


There are 9 slots and because nobody knows if there are other SKU's it was elaborately filled in and assumed that raven ridge = pinnacle ridge add different font and its obvious it is a forge.

2800 SKU - not confirmed
2500 SKU - not confirmed
Ryzen3 + - not confirmed

its easy to just throw in information and hope it fits, the shoddy editing makes it obvious the document is not a genuine one.
 

Attachments

  • amg-drops-ryzen-chips-prices.jpg
    amg-drops-ryzen-chips-prices.jpg
    132 KB · Views: 22
If the images are fake then that's disappointing - mainly because I was pleasantly surprised to even see 4.3ghz boost on the higher end model. My original guess was that we might see 4.2 or something along those lines in a best case scenario.
 
SimianRob said:
I'm really curious as to how binned the processors will be across the lineup. Will users be able to overclock the Ryzen 5 2600 or 2600X to similar 4.3/4.4 levels that the 2700X offers? It seems like they're really trying to segment the processors by cooler as well, which is sort of an artificial barrier with thermal headroom. I think it's going to be a tough battle for the midrange. The 2600X at $250 might be a tough sell if the 2600 can hit the same clockspeeds and offer a better value compared to the Intel counterparts. But the Ryzen 5 1600 was a huge seller for AMD, I can see why they might want to push more people towards the "X" model and get a little more cash out of the midrange/value chips. B450 + Ryzen 5 2600 could be a good value proposition since Intel have struggled to get h370/b360 boards out.
Click to expand...

X model's are pretty much binned the same.. the 1600x overclocked just as well as the 1700x and 1800x and also had the better IMC's while the non X model's tended to not overclock as well and also had issues with hitting 3200mhz and higher on some ram that worked fine on the X models. if they do a TR refresh they'll still be binning the top 5% of chips specifically for those so X model's would probably be the top 10-15% and the non X being what ever is left over.

as far as prices go i fully expect them to launch at the same prices ryzen originally launched at. there's no reason for them to price compete with their own previous gen hardware given how close they are in performance.. ultimately it creates more options for the consumer given both generation of processors will work on the 300 series and 400 series motherboards.
 
SimianRob said:
If the images are fake then that's disappointing - mainly because I was pleasantly surprised to even see 4.3ghz boost on the higher end model. My original guess was that we might see 4.2 or something along those lines in a best case scenario.
Click to expand...

The details may or may not be fake, but the slides are fake.
 
OrangeKhrush said:
The details may or may not be fake, but the slides are fake.
Click to expand...

The only thing I think people should consider is, while they definitely could be fake, I wouldn't put it past an AMD PR guy to whip this thing together by taking an existing slide and just modifying it to your new/current lineup. Laziness is a thing among professionals in any industry :p
 
cant wait to see some proper tests and benching tho! i would want to have choice between amd and intel purely based upon gaming performance. equal i would take amd any day over intel at this point. but im thinking for now upgrades for me would go like 1180ti2080ti? then maybe cpu... but i guess realistically my cpu would do just fine for another 2 years atleast i guess. ofc it wont be best one but.
 
demondrops said:
cant wait to see some proper tests and benching tho! i would want to have choice between amd and intel purely based upon gaming performance. equal i would take amd any day over intel at this point. but im thinking for now upgrades for me would go like 1180ti2080ti? then maybe cpu... but i guess realistically my cpu would do just fine for another 2 years atleast i guess. ofc it wont be best one but.
Click to expand...

if gaming is your primary objective and you're playing games at 1440p or higher, 5820k's definitely not going to be your bottleneck..
 
OrangeKhrush said:
I tried a contact in AMD and the origin of the slides was denied to be true, on the information they couldn't say anything due to the probing nature of the data would violate NDA terms. I could not get any confirmation on whether there is a tier higher SKU and similarly details on clocks, TDP and price are non disclosures, The slides have overlaps and things that seem like they are photo-shopped some really badly and the 2017 repeated is something in house editing will not repeatedly overlook and that many mistakes will result in disciplinary. This is a professional corporate and constant mistakes are just not really seen, I work in the Legal field and my documents are checked and fact checked and checked again before submission, I have not had a typo on a document in 7 years.
Click to expand...

Obviously the slides have edits, but it doesn't imply the information is fake. The Zen slides were also edited and many people said then they were fake, when they were legit. Here one example of an edited slide with typography and location of text not matching the rest



AMD is also known for releasing slides with glaring typos in giant font

aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9DLzcvNjQ5NzM1L29yaWdpbmFsL1J5emVuMi5KUEc=


Also recall the infamous fake slides about Zen. Within the same week AMD released official statement about the slides being fake. AMD isn't negating anything this time...
 
Last edited:
Who in their right mind would play skyrim at 400 FPS.
It's a bethesda engine... If you go above 72 FPS shit starts to get funky...
 
Fired Skyrim up for the first time over the weekend and experienced that loveliness.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
X model's are pretty much binned the same.. the 1600x overclocked just as well as the 1700x and 1800x and also had the better IMC's while the non X model's tended to not overclock as well and also had issues with hitting 3200mhz and higher on some ram that worked fine on the X models. if they do a TR refresh they'll still be binning the top 5% of chips specifically for those so X model's would probably be the top 10-15% and the non X being what ever is left over.

as far as prices go i fully expect them to launch at the same prices ryzen originally launched at. there's no reason for them to price compete with their own previous gen hardware given how close they are in performance.. ultimately it creates more options for the consumer given both generation of processors will work on the 300 series and 400 series motherboards.
Click to expand...

I can say that in my limited experience with them, the X chips had better memory controllers that fought me a whole lot less. Same memory with two different CPU's (1600x and 1700) would result in errors on the non-x and run perfectly fine on the x at 2933mhz. Both were fine at 2400mhz.
 
kirbyrj said:
I can say that in my limited experience with them, the X chips had better memory controllers that fought me a whole lot less. Same memory with two different CPU's (1600x and 1700) would result in errors on the non-x and run perfectly fine on the x at 2933mhz. Both were fine at 2400mhz.
Click to expand...

yup agree.. i learned that mistake the hard way going with my 1600 but it was worth it for the 50 dollars i saved at the time.. later tested my ram in a 1700x build i did for a friend and was actually able to get 3066 at xmp timing with the rated voltage to work while i could only get 2933 @ 1.39v w/ xmp timing.
 
Is there really a possibility of such variation/binning when it comes to the IMC?
I get the silicon lottery with core headroom, but IMC variation is news to me :/

Moreover, will this still be an issue on the refresh? I thought memory teething issues should have been addressed by now. Of course we have a new chipset and mobo, so maybe these things will need to be repeated for 6-9 months after launch?
 
Mav451 said:
Is there really a possibility of such variation/binning when it comes to the IMC?
I get the silicon lottery with core headroom, but IMC variation is news to me :/

Moreover, will this still be an issue on the refresh? I thought memory teething issues should have been addressed by now. Of course we have a new chipset and mobo, so maybe these things will need to be repeated for 6-9 months after launch?
Click to expand...

I'm sure there is some binning, but my 1700 has been running at rated timings and speed for quite a while using hynix ram, which was supposed to be an issue even the highest bin chips. Could be an outlier or could be just anecdotal differences in individual chips.

I'd imagine the refresh will be roughly the same just shifted up 200-400mhz.
 
I'm thinking of AMD for the next upgrade. I'm on an older Ivy Bridge I-7. So, I'm curious to see how things are with the new proc when available. If all is well, I'll make the upgrade 6 months after the launch.
 
bobzdar said:
I'm sure there is some binning, but my 1700 has been running at rated timings and speed for quite a while using hynix ram, which was supposed to be an issue even the highest bin chips. Could be an outlier or could be just anecdotal differences in individual chips.

I'd imagine the refresh will be roughly the same just shifted up 200-400mhz.
Click to expand...

hynix is pretty much locked at 2933 with ryzen.. if you get a lucky chip you might be able to get 3066 stable but anything over that is impossible. some IMC's though may need a slight voltage increase and some may not with the hynix chips but overall as long as you run them no higher than 2933 they'll 100% work with ryzen at XMP timing.
 
I think you should put together Ryzen 5 1600x at least have 12 threads AND there is some OC headroom. I have no issue with that and could be ok rig. It was more debatable going up to that 1700x/1800x...

But the AMD fanboyism has been pretty bad about the worst I've seen, won't get into that...
 
Last edited:
dook43 said:
no mod, it's an edit to the .INI file.....

However, as in bethesda fashion, they fixed the issue in Fallout 4 and didn't bother going back to fix it in skyrim.
Click to expand...

It was more a joke on the amount of mods some people use with that game.
 
I always be impartial, and now rigth now. No one can say AMD is better then intel performance wise. Even if it comes down to a few fps at a given resolution, at the rigth circumstances intel will destroy AMD. That is just how it is. It's not bias. It's like comparing an older Intel cpu to a new AMD cpu, even if they are close at high resolutions where they both will be really close, the intel cpu will be better still. For most my gaming life i had amd/radeon setup more so then intel/nvidia.. Because for most part they been equal or better. Only in last years ive been heavily nvidia intel fanwhored. That is one good thing for me regardless of what i posess i am impartial. that is one feat that i do poesses... To be honest i LIKE amd more then intel, that is just by how i feel. AMD is better in that respect really, i could stand behind amd but intel is better, even if i like it or not.
 
Last edited:
demondrops said:
I always be impartial, and now rigth now. No one can say AMD is better then intel performance wise. Even if it comes down to a few fps at a given resolution, at the rigth circumstances intel will destroy AMD. That is just how it is. It's not bias. It's like comparing an older Intel cpu to a new AMD cpu, even if they are close at high resolutions where they both will be really close, the intel cpu will be better still. For most my gaming life i had amd/radeon setup more so then intel/nvidia.. Because for most part they been equal or better. Only in last years ive been heavily nvidia intel fanwhored. That is one good thing for me regardless of what i posess i am impartial. that is one feat that i do poesses... To be honest i LIKE amd more then intel, that is just by how i feel. AMD is better in that respect really, i could stand behind amd but intel is better, even if i like it or not.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? When comparing AMD products at a similar price to intel, AMD wrecks them. for petes sake, my $65 FX6300 destroys my i7-7700hq at cryptonight mining. Who cares about fps, its not like my FX-6300 isnt able to maintain 100+ in the games i play anyway. I game maybe 1 hour a day, i mine the other 23, which do you think is more important? Or we could even talk about productivity, where my ryzen 1700 completely wrecks anything intel has in the $250 price point. Tho whole reason AMD fans are so rabid is the ROI.
 
I believe we compare performance to performance, that is the point of this post. i will never clain amd does not have it's merits, because it does. and honetly if in the aspect of perfomancei could choose between amd and itnel id take AMD any day.
 
demondrops said:
I always be impartial, and now rigth now. No one can say AMD is better then intel performance wise. Even if it comes down to a few fps at a given resolution, at the rigth circumstances intel will destroy AMD. That is just how it is. It's not bias. It's like comparing an older Intel cpu to a new AMD cpu, even if they are close at high resolutions where they both will be really close, the intel cpu will be better still. For most my gaming life i had amd/radeon setup more so then intel/nvidia.. Because for most part they been equal or better. Only in last years ive been heavily nvidia intel fanwhored. That is one good thing for me regardless of what i posess i am impartial. that is one feat that i do poesses... To be honest i LIKE amd more then intel, that is just by how i feel. AMD is better in that respect really, i could stand behind amd but intel is better, even if i like it or not.
Click to expand...

impartial.jpg
 
demondrops said:
I always be impartial, and now rigth now. No one can say AMD is better then intel performance wise. Even if it comes down to a few fps at a given resolution, at the rigth circumstances intel will destroy AMD. That is just how it is. It's not bias. It's like comparing an older Intel cpu to a new AMD cpu, even if they are close at high resolutions where they both will be really close, the intel cpu will be better still. For most my gaming life i had amd/radeon setup more so then intel/nvidia.. Because for most part they been equal or better. Only in last years ive been heavily nvidia intel fanwhored. That is one good thing for me regardless of what i posess i am impartial. that is one feat that i do poesses... To be honest i LIKE amd more then intel, that is just by how i feel. AMD is better in that respect really, i could stand behind amd but intel is better, even if i like it or not.
Click to expand...

they both trade blows depending on the circumstances and what they're being used for.. at this point i wouldn't really say one is outright better than the other it just depends on what you're planning to use it for.. if 1080p high fps is your thing then yeah definitely go intel, but if high resolution is what you want both are exactly the same. if you do other things that are thread count dependent then amd's probably the better option especially when it comes to cost.. those are just two examples that tend to be more specific to the reader base here, there's a lot of other features and what not one company has and the other doesn't that could potentially be a deciding factor in which platform you choose.

some one saying intel is outright better than amd or amd is outright better than intel with the current generation of processors/platforms is a disservice to them and everyone else around them.
 
Very interesting discussion happening between David Schor and other people. The so-claimed reduction of cache latency to 12 cycles in Raven Ridge and Pinnacle Ridge is not true. Zen always had 12 cycles latency as confirmed by AMD internal reports and reviews of EPYC.


DYueisWWAAEJ5Pl.jpg
 
Last edited:
juanrga said:
Very interesting discussion happening between David Schor and other people. The so-claimed reduction of cache latency to 12 cycles in Raven Ridge and Pinnacle Ridge is not true. Zen always had 12 cycles latency as confirmed by AMD internal reports and reviews of EPYC.


View attachment 60492
Click to expand...
It does say "no less than 12 cycles" which means it could take more than 12. Maybe they meant it hits the 12 cycle minimum more often than before? Of course, can't rule out someone at AMD talking out of their ass, but that sounds reasonable to me.
 
Nobu said:
It does say "no less than 12 cycles" which means it could take more than 12. Maybe they meant it hits the 12 cycle minimum more often than before? Of course, can't rule out someone at AMD talking out of their ass, but that sounds reasonable to me.
Click to expand...

Keywords: "variable load-to-use latency". AMD is reporting the minimum latency of the cache, which was 12-cycles for first gen Zen products and continues being 12-cycles for second gen (Raven Ridge, Pinnacle Ridge, and whatever is named the new ThreadRipper).

The Anandtech review mentioned also listed 12 cycles as the L2 latency for EPYC.
 
juanrga said:
Keywords: "variable load-to-use latency". AMD is reporting the minimum latency of the cache, which was 12-cycles for first gen Zen products and continues being 12-cycles for second gen (Raven Ridge, Pinnacle Ridge, and whatever is named the new ThreadRipper).

The Anandtech review mentioned also listed 12 cycles as the L2 latency for EPYC.
Click to expand...

How's Intel's L2 latency? Just how faster is it?
 
AMD made a foolish decision with this naming convention (or perhaps the server guys did)

The new "Epyc embedded" processor which looks great for your NAS, extremely high end router, mini servers and so on, is the "Epyc 3000" series.
So you'll end up with Ryzen 3000 and Epyc 3000 in a year or two. (or more simplified for dummy users "That umm AMD 3000 CPU I want!")

Also, god damn would they just bite the bullet and make the 2600 regular edition, $160 US? Kick off a serious price war. That would be an insane CPU not to buy at that price.
 
AbRASiON said:
AMD made a foolish decision with this naming convention (or perhaps the server guys did)

The new "Epyc embedded" processor which looks great for your NAS, extremely high end router, mini servers and so on, is the "Epyc 3000" series.
So you'll end up with Ryzen 3000 and Epyc 3000 in a year or two. (or more simplified for dummy users "That umm AMD 3000 CPU I want!")
Click to expand...

Hardly anyone in the mainstream would know what Epyc is so it hardly matters.

AbRASiON said:
Also, god damn would they just bite the bullet and make the 2600 regular edition, $160 US? Kick off a serious price war. That would be an insane CPU not to buy at that price.
Click to expand...

AMD cannot win a price war.
 
AbRASiON said:
AMD made a foolish decision with this naming convention (or perhaps the server guys did)

The new "Epyc embedded" processor which looks great for your NAS, extremely high end router, mini servers and so on, is the "Epyc 3000" series.
So you'll end up with Ryzen 3000 and Epyc 3000 in a year or two. (or more simplified for dummy users "That umm AMD 3000 CPU I want!")

Also, god damn would they just bite the bullet and make the 2600 regular edition, $160 US? Kick off a serious price war. That would be an insane CPU not to buy at that price.
Click to expand...

For what you get the pricing is fine plus they need the r&d money. A price war is only a short term fix for consumers, we need long term competition between amd and Intel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top