AMD Ryzen 5 Processors Start At $169 and Launch on April 11th

Discussion in '[H]ard|OCP Front Page News' started by Zarathustra[H], Mar 15, 2017.

  1. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Pick your own.....you deserve it.

    Messages:
    23,232
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Ooops... Looks like someone over at Guru3D pulled a stupid and announced something they shouldn't have a little early. The story has been taken down now, but not before LegitReviews took it and ran with it. It looks like Ryzen 5, 6 core, 12 thread and 4 core, 8 thread CPU's are coming on April 11th, and will start at $169.

    With the CCX modules of 4 cores, I can't help but wonder how the 6 core parts will be configured. Two modules with one core disabled on each, maybe?

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 16, 2017
    BloodyIron and Sith'ari like this.
  2. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge Not the Idiot YOU are Looking for

    Messages:
    4,504
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Here comes the hurt: while the r7 series straddled the line in terms of price/performance depending on user workload, these guys are coming through like a buckshot blast.
     
  3. SvenBent

    SvenBent [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,824
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Hmm 2 CCX with 1 core disabled each.... maybe we will get a return of the unlocking core settings :D that would be nice

    I'm betting on a 4core CCX + 2core CCx module. no disabled cores
     
    Pusher of Buttons likes this.
  4. WhoBeDaPlaya

    WhoBeDaPlaya 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,258
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2002
    $169 for 6c/12t? That's like friggin' used Xeon prices :eek:
     
  5. Cali3350

    Cali3350 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,626
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2002
    This is where AMD will rule the roost imo. Intel's i3 line just wont compete.
     
  6. Singularity_Survivor

    Singularity_Survivor Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    223
    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    Imo, the Ryzen 5 1500X is the true competitor of the 7700K. 4/8 vs 4/8, one priced at $199 the other $349. Fun times ahead......
     
    {NG}Fidel likes this.
  7. auntjemima

    auntjemima 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,631
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    You realise there is a price discrepancy because of the performance, correct?
     
  8. Peter2k

    Peter2k Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    248
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2016
    says 4 core for 169$

    still 220$ for 6 core isn't shabby :D
     
  9. Gigantopithecus

    Gigantopithecus [H]ardOCP Case Reviewer

    Messages:
    1,139
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Intel's i3 line already doesn't compete against Intel's own Pentium G4560!
     
  10. Peter2k

    Peter2k Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    248
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2016
    It's no competition for real

    if a R7 clocked (OC) to 4.Ghz can't compete with a stock i7 then a R5 can't either

    it's priced to compete with i5's

    where it should show the same pattern

    good enough for gaming, depending on the game maybe even on par or slightly ahead of an i5 (at stock)

    great for multitasking

    it's more about the bang for the buck
     
    atp1916 and Semantics like this.
  11. DPI

    DPI [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,087
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    We can hope, but I'd be surprised if they're anywhere within the 7700K ballpark, or i5-7600k for that matter. Otherwise AMD should have put their best foot forward and released these first.
     
  12. britjh22

    britjh22 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    340
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    The 4c/8t start at $169, the cheapest 6c/12t is $219 (R5 1600) according to the leak, which is still super well priced compared to X99.

    The G4560 is really the most interesting processor that Intel has launched recently, sorta sad to say.
     
  13. fuzzylogik

    fuzzylogik Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    490
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    oops? lol, read the review over at Guru3D when it was there. Thought nothing of an embargo being mixed up but ahh well, not that far away thankfully :)
     
  14. Pusher of Buttons

    Pusher of Buttons [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,267
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Hoping that a few disabled cores will increase overclockability? I'd love for there to be at least one "gaming" gem that outcompetes Intel for the price point in games...I know that's not the whole market, but they need to really be able to corner at least one segment of the gaming market.
     
  15. jardows

    jardows Gawd

    Messages:
    819
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2015
    Remember, this is only true in games, and there have been tweaks demonstrated to close the gap there.

    I was actually looking more for the R3 or APU's for a business system build, but to start with a 4c/8t processor at $169, if this leak is true, is very, very tempting!
     
  16. dgingeri

    dgingeri 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,317
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Actually, from the benchamrks I've seen of an 1800X with one CCX disabled, the 1500X will be faster in games than the full 1800X. (Unless you want to run the 1800X with half the cores disabled.) The lack of CCX transfers cause much better gaming performance, and in most other cases, near equal performance with the 7700k, at default clock rates. The conclusion the reviewer had in regards to 1500X vs 7700K was 90% of the performance at 60% of the cost. The 1500X is going to push the 7700k price down, no doubt.
     
    Revdarian likes this.
  17. leathco016

    leathco016 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    103
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    These are the chips I am interested in. Hoping to see some good competition for the i5 and a significantly lower price.
     
  18. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,268
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    At stock speeds. Overclocked, it'll be about 80% of the performance at 60% of the cost. Still not a bad deal.
     
    Revdarian likes this.
  19. Riccochet

    Riccochet Necrodancer

    Messages:
    22,721
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Ryzen, beats Intel 60% of the time, every time.
     
  20. SBSuperfly

    SBSuperfly Gawd

    Messages:
    866
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    consoles?
     
    Pusher of Buttons likes this.
  21. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    19,675
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    it's not much different from the i5's having better gaming performance than i7's.. there's always trade offs.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2017
  22. Nauseous

    Nauseous Gawd

    Messages:
    795
    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
  23. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge Not the Idiot YOU are Looking for

    Messages:
    4,504
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    This occurs in games that aren't just HT ignorant, but HT retarded.

    And it would affect Ryzen the same way (i.e., trying to schedule two FP-heavy threads on a single physical core).
     
  24. Burticus

    Burticus 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,522
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Oopsie. I think maybe these are the droids we are looking for. $169 for 4c/8t might be a winner.
     
  25. Wierdo

    Wierdo [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,553
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    It's been a while since there was a heated discussion about processor performance, finally some variety of choices, isn't that just swell?

    I can finally start reading processor release reviews again now that it's not gonna be another predictable "meh five percent more performance after a couple years" piece.

    Gotta love competition, wish US broadband market had some of that too.
     
  26. Flogger23m

    Flogger23m [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,459
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Was hoping the 1600 would be $200 flat. $20 more is not a lot, but we're getting close to i5 territory and the i5 will likely be faster in a number of games. At $200 MSRP it would be a good $40-50 cheaper, and would trade blows in the few games that support HT and extra cores. And lets be honest, at $200-250, people who buy CPUs are mostly buying it for gaming. Heavy CPU users will gladly spend $600-700 on a CPU if it makes work take less time. It will blow the i5 out of the water for production work and the like, but most of those people won't be skimping on the CPU in the first place.

    Needs to be a bit cheaper, IMO, to blow the i5 out of the market. But I suppose we will wait for the benchmarks.
     
  27. psyclist

    psyclist Gawd

    Messages:
    706
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Oh boy, mainstream bang for your buck...save $160 on the CPU and get a faster GPU with the savings!
     
    Modred189 likes this.
  28. iRevert

    iRevert Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    270
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    Lets just hope for gaming sake the 6 core isn't a 3+3 and instead is a 4+2.

    Or an 8 core that didn't cut the snuff and has two cores locked.
     
  29. Master_shake_

    Master_shake_ 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,800
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-Launching-Ryzen-5-Six-Core-Processors-Soon-Q2-2017

    3+3 it is.

    unfortunately no tri, penta, or septa cores.

    edit: i guess it's called a hepta (7)
     
    SighTurtle likes this.
  30. chenw

    chenw 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,868
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    G4560 currently cannot be touched by AMD though, which is the fun part :p, AMD always had a decent hand (if not outright upper hand) in the budget CPUs until G4560 came out, and Ryzen's lowest member still can't touch it in terms of pricing.

    And I don't think there are anything AMD's Ryzen can do, but there is at least 1 thing G4560 can do that Ryzen can't.

    I'd be interested to see the 4C8T CPUs and how they stand up against current i7's (which uses the same CT configs), and the lower end Ryzens against i3's and G4560.
     
  31. Singularity_Survivor

    Singularity_Survivor Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    223
    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    The G4560 is a budget gaming cpu, period. Compared to a $160 Ryzen 4/8 it would be crushed at any productive task.
     
  32. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    48,080
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    In closing, while AMD would not answer questions on this previously, Anandtech says these CPUs will be 3x3 and 2x2 when it comes to CCX derivation.



    We have confirmation from AMD that there are no silly games going to be played with Ryzen 5. The six-core parts will be a strict 3+3 combination, while the four-core parts will use 2+2. This will be true across all CPUs, ensuring a consistent performance throughout.
     
    ChadD likes this.
  33. pendragon1

    pendragon1 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,285
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    how many R5 threads are going?! geeeeze...
     
    fuzzylogik likes this.
  34. EchoWars

    EchoWars Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    433
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Difficult to compare the G4560 to anything from AMD till they release a Ryzen-based APU later in the year.
     
  35. Grimlaking

    Grimlaking [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,701
    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Fun times ahead in CPU land!! ;)
     
  36. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    19,675
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    well rip there goes my theory and hope that it was just a single CCX on the quads... only thing that doesn't make sense though is that it's showing in the spec sheets 8mb L3 cache instead of 16, so why is the full 16mb of L3 cache not available all of a sudden if they're using a 2x2 config.
     
  37. Templar_X

    Templar_X n00bie

    Messages:
    25
    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    This =/
     
  38. Nobified[H]

    Nobified[H] [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,446
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    I don't know if it is me, I just lost interests in PC stuff. Nothing like the glory days of 1995 to 2001! :hungover:
     
    Modred189 likes this.
  39. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    19,675
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    it's called getting old, lol.. :p but yeah i know what you mean, those were the times when having the newest and greatest thing actually made a significant difference and where it was hardware catching up with the software.. sadly around that 2002-2003 point the hardware surpassed the software and it's been that way ever since.
     
  40. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,268
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    This does make the most sense from a manufacturing standpoint. Only one manufacturing line for all the CPUs.

    The most interesting part is whether or not we can unlock cores. It would be like a throwback to the Phenom II days, like trying to get a Phenom II 960T and unlocking it to be a 1090T.
     
    spine likes this.