AMD Ryzen 7 7700X Pictured, Installed On AM5 Motherboard specs/prices

Legendary Gamer said:
I bought a house in 2011 for 134K then sold that home in Valparaiso, Indiana in 2019 for 189K, this year, that same home is going for 289K (if it was sold). Even with the uptick, the money I would have made off it if I had sold it today wouldn't have gone as far...

In 2019, I picked up a fixer upper in a nearby town for 138k. Fixed it, paid it off and gonna live in it until I die. However, today it's worth ... 250+K.

Anyone getting into the homes market now, with likely little to no additional income increases, is screwed.
Click to expand...
Damn, houses here are $500-$600k now or more. Anything under that is in bad parts of town or needs a lot of work. Anything around $200-$300k tends to be condos or apartments. It's ridiculous.
 
Sir Beregond said:
Damn, houses here are $500-$600k now or more. Anything under that is in bad parts of town or needs a lot of work. Anything around $200-$300k tends to be condos or apartments. It's ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Houses in my area very nearly tripled in price at the market's peak compared to 2.5 years ago. Thankfully, nobody was buying at those prices even when interest rates were still low. House prices are almost back down to where they were last year.
 
It's somewhat disappointing that the chipset(s) are connected to the CPU via a single PCIe 4.0 x4 uplink. Though from what I've read about the cost and complexity of implementing PCIe 5.0, I'm not sure how realistic the alternatives would be.

And PCIe 7.0 has already been announced...
Furious_Styles said:
I take back my former post. I just checked and the most expensive Asus is $2k. lol!
Click to expand...
Well, someone has to pay for the R&D of all that new RGB lighting technology... And don't forgot the ROG membership dues.
 
ElementDave said:
Well, someone has to pay for the R&D of all that new RGB lighting technology... And don't forgot the ROG membership dues.
Click to expand...
Yep, what's that saying, there's a sucker born every minute? Well Asus decided it was high time to capitalize.
 
Sir Beregond said:
That looks like its going to be fun to clean thermal paste off of.
Click to expand...

As someone who cleans CPU every day, this was my very first thought in seeing this.

Legendary Gamer said:
I bought a house in 2011 for 134K then sold that home in Valparaiso, Indiana in 2019 for 189K, this year, that same home is going for 289K (if it was sold). Even with the uptick, the money I would have made off it if I had sold it today wouldn't have gone as far...

In 2019, I picked up a fixer upper in a nearby town for 138k. Fixed it, paid it off and gonna live in it until I die. However, today it's worth ... 250+K.

Anyone getting into the homes market now, with likely little to no additional income increases, is screwed.
Click to expand...

Your anecdotal experience isn't empirical data. I'm also struggling to see the corelation between housing prices in Indiana and the cost of motherboards manufactured in Southeast Asia, Taiwan, and China.
 
Beaflag VonRathburg said:
As someone who cleans CPU every day, this was my very first thought in seeing this.



Your anecdotal experience isn't empirical data. I'm also struggling to see the corelation between housing prices in Indiana and the cost of motherboards manufactured in Southeast Asia, Taiwan, and China.
Click to expand...
The price of everything has gone up, everywhere. I simply used my location to show how much the cost has risen in podunk middle America.

My home pricing was in response to another person's comments.

The pricing of motherboards is going to be 1. The new tech in them and 2. What the corporate goons at AMD and Intel can gouge their customers for.

Same thing with video cards. The prices of everything has gotten a bit out of control, even with the falling prices
 
Legendary Gamer said:
The price of everything has gone up, everywhere. I simply used my location to show how much the cost has risen in podunk middle America.

My home pricing was in response to another person's comments.

The pricing of motherboards is going to be 1. The new tech in them and 2. What the corporate goons at AMD and Intel can gouge their customers for.

Same thing with video cards. The prices of everything has gotten a bit out of control, even with the falling prices
Click to expand...

Correct. If we know global prices have gone up on everything, we know why motherboard prices are more expensive. Lakados had great input on manufacturing costs of motherboards:

Lakados said:
The new boards and all those PCIE4 and 5 tracings are what drive costs up. They are bigger and thicker and require spacing away from certain types of equipment to prevent noise contamination and blah blah blah. And the chipsets do require newer nodes probably 12nm to be able to do what they do and not require active cooling. Then there are the new power requirements and cleaning requirements, the specs on these parts are so tight that they can’t have much voltage variance at all and remain stable. So we get to pay for the better VRM’s capacitors registers and all that jazz. It just drives costs up and with supply how it currently is those parts too are not only more expensive because of them being higher quality but they themselves are more costly to actually make because (gestures at everything).

So basically we’re just stuck with more expensive parts as a whole, then add in the AIB’s liking their new higher margins and we are where we are and it sucks.
Click to expand...

You or anyone else, why are we talking about housing in the US when it has nothing to do with the costs of the motherboards manufactured thousands of miles across the globe? Should we start talking about fuel prices? That'd have more of an input on end user pricing to components? People tend to start ranting about unrelated topics without even reading the article in the original post.

The original post was about the 7700x and the article mentions motherboard prices in Euros taken from retail listings. Do we know if that price is VAT (21%) inclusive? If so, the USD cost for the boards could be still expensive, but significantly lower.
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
Unfortunately (or fortunately for me since I own a home) I don't see real estate prices dropping much. They moved down a little with interest rates having gone up, but mortgage rates are already starting to go down again.
Click to expand...
I don't know about your area but my area the tri-state area has a lot of empty houses that people have been trying to sell for 2-4 years. Mostly empty, as in no furniture. You see the history of the sale of these houses where they weren't selling for an insane price even in 2018, then raised the price during the pandemic, only to lower the price further than before. Yea, you're looking at a crash soon.
This is not 2007/2008. unlike back then, mortgages these days have pretty high standards. (If you haven't applied for a mortgage lately, you wouldn't believe how intrusive the process has become)
Click to expand...
I do know most houses are being bought with FHA loans, because people don't have money for a down payment. Sounds like a recipe for 2008 part 2, now government backed.
Anyway, while mentions of inflation were relevant to Motherboard pricing, this has probably veered way off topic, so I am dropping it here.
Click to expand...
The point I'm making is that inflation is stupid and arbitrary. I've had a solar panel installer come by that was going to install it for free, but would charge me something like 2% more per year, for inflation. It's a terrible choice to go solar, and the 2% is just an excuse. Something like 4 years later and you'll pay more for electricity than without the solar. Inflation is an excuse to charge more. It usually works because nobody knows how the economy works, and especially how inflation works. That's why gas and food is stupid right now, just like how graphic cards were stupid for the past 2 years.

Nvidia has so many graphic cards that they don't know what to do with them, but they certainly don't want to sell them for a discount, which is the obvious choice. I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia and the AIB partners just destroy the cards so they don't enter the market and devalue everything. I doubt that's what AMD will do, but I think AMD is either ignorant to the market situation or the 7700X is going to be amazing. The 58003DX is gong to be cheaper, and I doubt the 7700X comes with V-Cache. I think AMD will eventually release a 77003DX, but I doubt the 7700X is going to justify a $200 or $200 price increase over their previous generation products.
 
Last edited:
Those 5800x3d will hold value well long term. I expect those to do well on eBay in 4 to 5 years. Everybody on a budget will want the fastest gaming am4 chip.
 
DukenukemX said:
I don't know about your area but my area the tri-state area has a lot of empty that people have been trying to sell for 2-4 years. Mostly empty, as in no furniture. You see the history of the sale of these houses where they weren't selling for an insane price even in 2018, then raised the price during the pandemic, only to lower the price further than before. Yea, you're look at a crash soon.

I do know most houses are being bought with FHA loans, because people don't have money for a down payment. Sounds like a recipe for 2008 part 2, now government backed.

The point I'm making is that inflation is stupid and arbitrary. I've had a solar panel installer come by that was going to install it for free, but would charge me something like 2% more per year, for inflation. It's a terrible choice to go solar, and the 2% is just an excuse. Something like 4 years later and you'll pay more for electricity than without the solar. Inflation is an excuse to charge more. It usually works because nobody knows how the economy works, and especially how inflation works. That's why gas and food is stupid right now, just like how graphic cards were stupid for the past 2 years.

Nvidia has so many graphic cards that they don't know what to do with them, but they certainly don't want to sell them for a discount, which is the obvious choice. I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia and the AIB partners just destroy the cards so they don't enter the market and devalue everything. I doubt that's what AMD will do, but I think AMD is either ignorant to the market situation or the 7700X is going to be amazing. The 58003DX is gong to be cheaper, and I doubt the 7700X comes with V-Cache. I think AMD will eventually release a 77003DX, but I doubt the 7700X is going to justify a $200 or $200 price increase over their previous generation products.
Click to expand...
Why do you call it "stupid" when it clearly exists. If I'm a grocery store and gas prices go up significantly then it's going to cost me more to buy the same stuff because the shipping charges will increase. So in turn I raise prices at least some to offset that. If I don't then I'm taking whatever the price increase is as a cut to my bottom line.
 
Randall Stephens said:
Those 5800x3d will hold value well long term. I expect those to do well on eBay in 4 to 5 years. Everybody on a budget will want the fastest gaming am4 chip.
Click to expand...
I honestly think most people will have migrated away from AM4 by then. There are a few hold outs, but most enthusiasts upgrade if there is a socket change in that time.
 
Dreamerbydesign said:
I honestly think most people will have migrated away from AM4 by then. There are a few hold outs, but most enthusiasts upgrade if there is a socket change in that time.
Click to expand...
For enthusiasts sure, but little Johnny looking to do some gaming on his old hand me down computer with a 1600x will see the option of a $200 cpu that doubles his performance in games quite attractive vs a $1000 dollar solution that triples it.
 
Furious_Styles said:
Why do you call it "stupid" when it clearly exists. If I'm a grocery store and gas prices go up significantly then it's going to cost me more to buy the same stuff because the shipping charges will increase. So in turn I raise prices at least some to offset that. If I don't then I'm taking whatever the price increase is as a cut to my bottom line.
Click to expand...
The stores aren't the main problem. This is mostly a supplier issue. What you see happening right now is that everyone priced themselves out of the market. This is why the stock market has dropped, and will likely continue to drop once they can't rally anymore. Everyone has lower sales with each quarter. You can't keep raising prices and expect people to always pay. Situations like this usually requires someone to lose, and the go to loser is usually the consumer. What people will do is either not buy, or go cheaper. Don't be surprised if Ramen Noodle is selling better than ever in super markets, while other produce only move when there's a sale. Remember, someone has to lose money or make less money but the question is who?

As for AMD's 7700X, it had better be much faster than not only the 5800X, but also the 58003DX. Not only you need to pay more for the CPU but for a lot of people they'll need new motherboards and DDR5 ram as well, for what I'm sure is a barely 10% increase of IPC over Zen3.

Dreamerbydesign said:
I honestly think most people will have migrated away from AM4 by then. There are a few hold outs, but most enthusiasts upgrade if there is a socket change in that time.
Click to expand...
I tend to hold onto my hardware for so long that I usually upgrade the motherboard ram and CPU when I do an upgrade. I thought about upgrading from my B350 AM4 motherboard, but for what? There's no point other than to get newer CPU support that I'll never use, plus faster SSD performance that requires me to buy a new SSD to see any benefits.
 
Beaflag VonRathburg said:
Correct. If we now global prices have gone up on everything, we know why motherboard prices are more expensive. Lakados had great input on manufacturing costs of motherboards:



You or anyone else, why are we talking about housing in the US when it has nothing to do with the costs of the motherboards manufactured thousands of miles across the globe? Should we start talking about fuel prices? That'd have more of an input on end user pricing to components? People tend to start ranting about unrelated topics without even reading the article in the original post.

The original post was about the 7700x and the article mentions motherboard prices in Euros taken from retail listings. Do we know if that price is VAT (21%) inclusive? If so, the USD cost for the boards could be still expensive, but significantly lower.
Click to expand...
I'm trying really hard to not be an asshole...

Not really certain why you're coming after me when I engaged in a conversation with others here about something mentioned in the thread. If you don't like what I have written, contact a forum admin to have them nuke my posts (if they somehow warrant it).

I'm not talking to YOU about housing costs, I replied to something someone else said. This is a forum will we discuss lots of things. So, your opinion is noted.

As far as what Lakados said about what is driving up the prices of motherboards I already said that (and agree with their assessment).

Go bother someone else.
 
Last edited:
DukenukemX said:
The stores aren't the main problem. This is mostly a supplier issue. What you see happening right now is that everyone priced themselves out of the market. This is why the stock market has dropped, and will likely continue to drop once they can't rally anymore. Everyone has lower sales with each quarter. You can't keep raising prices and expect people to always pay. Situations like this usually requires someone to lose, and the go to loser is usually the consumer. What people will do is either not buy, or go cheaper. Don't be surprised if Ramen Noodle is selling better than ever in super markets, while other produce only move when there's a sale. Remember, someone has to lose money or make less money but the question is who?

As for AMD's 7700X, it had better be much faster than not only the 5800X, but also the 58003DX. Not only you need to pay more for the CPU but for a lot of people they'll need new motherboards and DDR5 ram as well, for what I'm sure is a barely 10% increase of IPC over Zen3.


I tend to hold onto my hardware for so long that I usually upgrade the motherboard ram and CPU when I do an upgrade. I thought about upgrading from my B350 AM4 motherboard, but for what? There's no point other than to get newer CPU support that I'll never use, plus faster SSD performance that requires me to buy a new SSD to see any benefits.
Click to expand...

That is not why the stock market dropped. It dropped due to looming recessionary fears and Fed rate hikes.
 
NightReaver said:
I get that part. It's just silly to call them a "16 core cpu" when comparing it to a true 16c/32t cpu.
Click to expand...
yep and it's by all the same people that were complaining about amd calling their FX chips 8 core. not to mention intel pulling the same or more wattage as the FX chips in some cases.
 
Furious_Styles said:
That is not why the stock market dropped. It dropped due to looming recessionary fears and Fed rate hikes.
Click to expand...
Recession fears is very general. What are they fearing exactly? The auto market for example is already falling apart, with all time high repo's. They have more cars than they know what to do with, and they don't want to sell them all at once in fear of lowered pricing. Netflix just reported that instead of their estimated 2 million subscriber loss, they only lost nearly 1 million. Nvidia has more graphics cards than they care to admit, and will likely have to sell them for much cheaper than what Nvidia would like to sell them. Generally speaking, everyone is losing sales. As for the Fed rate hikes, it's because it was zero for the past 2 years. They're hoping to lower inflation by doing this. Be afraid of European countries with negative interest rates. Basically, some Euro countries pay banks to borrow money.

It's not one thing but generally you see the results in quarterly reports, and eventually the stock market.

d3athf1sh said:
yep and it's by all the same people that were complaining about amd calling their FX chips 8 core. not to mention intel pulling the same or more wattage as the FX chips in some cases.
Click to expand...
If the 12900K didn't have 16 cores then I don't know why it's so much faster in Cinebench R23 multi-threaded, than say a 5800X. Damn near doubles it in that score. As far as I'm concerned the FX chips had a semi 8 core setup. Eight integer cores but only 4 FPU cores. Depending on the work load, it either acted like an 8 core, or like a 4 core. Like everything when shopping it depends on the price, and generally the FX 8350 was far more cheaper than most Intel i5's. Not just in CPU's but in motherboards as well. The problem was that AMD never attempted to improve on the bulldozer design, as anything after Trinity wasn't faster but slower. Also most motherboards had terrible VRM setups, even with the 6 core variants. The only motherboards that were truly capable of handling 8 core FX chips were the 990 based chipsets, and they were generally expensive. A lot of those motherboards, including my Gigabyte board, ended up burning out. The whole FX situation was a giant shit show.
-Core-i9-12900K-alleged-cinebench-r23-leaked-score.png
 
DukenukemX said:
If the 12900K didn't have 16 cores then I don't know why it's so much faster in Cinebench R23 multi-threaded, than say a 5800X. Damn near doubles it in that score. As far as I'm concerned the FX chips had a semi 8 core setup. Eight integer cores but only 4 FPU cores. Depending on the work load, it either acted like an 8 core, or like a 4 core. Like everything when shopping it depends on the price, and generally the FX 8350 was far more cheaper than most Intel i5's. Not just in CPU's but in motherboards as well. The problem was that AMD never attempted to improve on the bulldozer design, as anything after Trinity wasn't faster but slower. Also most motherboards had terrible VRM setups, even with the 6 core variants. The only motherboards that were truly capable of handling 8 core FX chips were the 990 based chipsets, and they were generally expensive. A lot of those motherboards, including my Gigabyte board, ended up burning out. The whole FX situation was a giant shit show.
Click to expand...
ok so really if you want to compare apples to apples you need to be putting your 12900k up against a ryzen 7950X. and even now it's not that much faster than a 16 core 5950x as you showed in your benchmark. but is that double the performance from their 8 core part? back in the amd FX days, they were getting nearly double the performance on highly threaded benchmarks running 8 vs 4 threads.

and if MS would have wrote a whole new OS to take advantage of the FX architecture like they've had to do w/ intel's 12 gen parts, we would have seen more multi-threaded adoption and better performance? because like i said on benchmarks that took advantage of all 8 threads it was beating the intel 4 core parts of the time. problem was games were still being wrote for 2 to 4 threads back then and intel had better single core performance. so i guess that's why i was still able to run an oc'd FX-8370 all the way up until i made the jump to Ryzen 3800X and never had a problem running games because, as time went on, more and more games were taking advantage of higher thread counts.
 
Last edited:
Legendary Gamer said:
The price of everything has gone up, everywhere. I simply used my location to show how much the cost has risen in podunk middle America.

My home pricing was in response to another person's comments.

The pricing of motherboards is going to be 1. The new tech in them and 2. What the corporate goons at AMD and Intel can gouge their customers for.

Same thing with video cards. The prices of everything has gotten a bit out of control, even with the falling prices
Click to expand...

You're right, everything is going up, how much depends on the area. Here my buddy bought a house in 2011 for under $250k and now its worth something like $600k. Our housing market is stupid, and I regret not getting serious about a house back several years ago thinking the bubble had to burst. Still waiting for that burst.
 
d3athf1sh said:
ok so really if you want to compare apples to apples you need to be putting your 12900k up against a ryzen 7950X. and even now it's not that much faster than a 16 core 5950x as you showed in your benchmark.
Click to expand...
The 12900K is $540 right now. The Ryzen 7950X is rumored to be over $1k, and the 5950X is currently $546. I'm not going by cores, but by price. I don't care if the 12900K is a little faster or a little slower compared to AMD. The 7700X is $60 cheaper than the 12900K but does have half the cores. The 7950X's rumored price is more than double.
but is that double the performance from their 8 core part? back in the amd FX days, they were getting nearly double the performance on highly threaded benchmarks running 8 vs 4 threads.
Click to expand...
In some games the FX 8350 that I own will be faster in some areas because of this. The FX CPU's weren't bad, the motherboards were. Wasn't uncommon for them to warp or to melt some plastic bits because of the power draw.
and if MS would have wrote a whole new OS to take advantage of the FX architecture like they've had to do w/ intel's 12 gen parts, we would have seen more multi-threaded adoption and better performance?
Click to expand...
That was a thing. AMD depended on Microsoft to fix their OS to get the most out of their CPU's, but Microsoft really took their time at it. Nowadays with Linux getting so much support from AMD, it puts Microsoft in a position when they're often compared to Linux and showing major performance issues.


because like i said on benchmarks that took advantage of all 8 threads it was beating the intel 4 core parts of the time. problem was games were still being wrote for 2 to 4 threads back then and intel had better single core performance. so i guess that's why i was still able to run an oc'd FX-8370 all the way up until i made the jump to Ryzen 3800X and never had a problem running games because, as time went on, more and more games were taking advantage of higher thread counts.
Click to expand...
Yes and no, cause most games today don't use more than 6 cores. Today an FX 8370 has aged better than say an i5 3750k, which was released about the same time. An i7 3770k though would hold up much better, and maybe even beat an FX 8370 in multi-threaded games. The problem is something like Handbrake will use all the threads and cores to the max, while games won't. This is because games have code that runs in order, and therefore can't just max cores. Developers will move parts out like sound and AI to take better advantage of the hardware, but it won't max out all the cores it uses. This is why IPC is still king for gaming, and will likely always be king. The only time having too little cores matters is when you start to not have enough, which last I checked was 6.
 
d3athf1sh said:
yep and it's by all the same people that were complaining about amd calling their FX chips 8 core. not to mention intel pulling the same or more wattage as the FX chips in some cases.
Click to expand...

AMD FX WAS 8 real cores. There was only one PFU per module, but that FPU could act either as a single 256bit FPU or as two separate 128bit FPU's.

The end result was that as long as you didn't need 256bit FPU (something that was exceedingly rare at the time) it functioned as 8 integer cores each with their own 128bit FPU, so in other words, 8 full cores.

Much has been made out of the FPU issue on the FX, but that wasn't its real problem. The real problem was that the architecture sucked and was not up to par with the competition at the time, due to AMD being damn near broke and not being able to dedicated the resources to the Bulldozer project that would have been necessary to make it truly competitive.

It was the norm (at least back then) for CPU designers to spend tons of engineer hours extensively hand optimizing the traces of CPU's. AMD's precarious financial position at the time forced them to rely heavily on the use of automatic layout tools, which resulted in a suboptimal design.

Layout tools may be better today (I don't know), but back then that apparently was not the case.

All of that said, I have to take back some of my derision of Intel's E-cores. I've spent the last couple of days going over benchmarks, and while the E-cores may not be quite as perfomant as the P-cores, they still help add a good deal of capacity. Some workloads (like Cinebench) scale almost 1:1 on the P cores and the E cores.

Presumably there are other workloads that don't scale as well though.

Also, while most modern operating systems kernels and schedulers have been updated to understand the P-Core, E-Core mix, a lot of legacy software and games may not, and this may result in performance issues on that legacy software.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Much has been made out of the FPU issue on the FX, but that wasn't its real problem. The real problem was that the architecture sucked and was not up to par with the competition at the time, due to AMD being damn near broke and not being able to dedicated the resources to the Bulldozer project that would have been necessary to make it truly competitive.

It was the norm (at least back then) for CPU designers to spend tons of engineer hours extensively hand optimizing the traces of CPU's. AMD's precarious financial position at the time forced them to rely heavily on the use of automatic layout tools, which resulted in a suboptimal design.

Layout tools may be better today (I don't know), but back then that apparently was not the case.
Click to expand...
Both AMD and Intel have made bad CPU architectures in the past, but there's a huge difference in how AMD and Intel handled the situation. Firstly, neither AMD or Intel can just turn around and make a new architecture whenever they want. It takes years maybe several before they're ready for release. For better or worse AMD and Intel are stuck with them for a while. When Intel created the Pentium 4's NetBurst architecture, it was awful. Despite the terribleness, Intel poured a lot of money to make it work, and it did work well. During the span of the NetBurst, we saw faster chipsets, dual channel memory, Hyperthreading, 64-bit, and support for newer instructions. Most if not all of these features still exist today, even on AMD's CPUs. AMD's Bulldozer saw the FX 8350 which was pretty good, but hasn't seen any upgrades beyond the 8370, which was a 8350 but overclocked. No chipset upgrades No new releases that improved the architecture in any way. It was stuck on 32nm. I get AMD was broke but make some effort to support the Bulldozer based architecture.

All of that said, I have to take back some of my derision of Intel's E-cores. I've spent the last couple of days going over benchmarks, and while the E-cores may not be quite as perfomant as the P-cores, they still help add a good deal of capacity. Some workloads (like Cinebench) scale almost 1:1 on the P cores and the E cores.

Presumably there are other workloads that don't scale as well though.

Also, while most modern operating systems kernels and schedulers have been updated to understand the P-Core, E-Core mix, a lot of legacy software and games may not, and this may result in performance issues on that legacy software.
Click to expand...
I've never been a fan of the big core little core design, but I know why Intel is doing this. I think Intel is trying to mimic a lot of the features we see on Apple's silicon, which does have the big little core design. Intel's Arc now has really good AV1 encoding, which is something we see from Apple, but neither AMD or Nvidia care too much about. Intel even went so much as to buy a bunch of TSMC's 3nm, to the point where they overpaid for it compared to Apple. Clearly Intel is very interested in competing directly with Apple in power efficiency, and the E-cores do seem to work, even though I still think it's a waste of silicon. AMD's Rembrandt is already proving that the whole Big little core design is a waste, and I'm sure once Zen4 is released and eventually makes its way to laptop parts then we'll see Big Little being a waste.
 
DukenukemX said:
I've never been a fan of the big core little core design, but I know why Intel is doing this. I think Intel is trying to mimic a lot of the features we see on Apple's silicon, which does have the big little core design. Intel's Arc now has really good AV1 encoding, which is something we see from Apple, but neither AMD or Nvidia care too much about. Intel even went so much as to buy a bunch of TSMC's 3nm, to the point where they overpaid for it compared to Apple. Clearly Intel is very interested in competing directly with Apple in power efficiency, and the E-cores do seem to work, even though I still think it's a waste of silicon. AMD's Rembrandt is already proving that the whole Big little core design is a waste, and I'm sure once Zen4 is released and eventually makes its way to laptop parts then we'll see Big Little being a waste.
Click to expand...

I know that is the INTENT of the E-cores, but at least the 12xxx series chips seem to run rather hot compared to equivalent AMD chips.

Something is still amiss, but I ahvent kept up with what node they are on now. Maybe that is just a node disadvantage.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I know that is the INTENT of the E-cores, but at least the 12xxx series chips seem to run rather hot compared to equivalent AMD chips.

Something is still amiss, but I ahvent kept up with what node they are on now. Maybe that is just a node disadvantage.
Click to expand...
AMD's been on 7nm for the past few years, but Intel has been on 10nm which they claim to be as good as 7nm. It obviously isn't, and AMD's new 7000 series is on 5nm just like Apple's Silicon. Next year AMD will be on 4nm for their mobile parts, while Rembrandt is on 6nm currently. For Intel to be buying boat loads of 3nm, tells me that their 10nm isn't obviously good enough. I think next year they'll be able to make 7nm, but I think their mobile parts will be on TSMC's 3nm. Intel even bought a line for IBM's 2nm as did Apple. I think Intel is gunning for Apple and good for them.
 
Out of curiosity will this new architecture only support ddr4? Or will it do ddr4. I mean I get not the same on a single motherboard but are you going to be stuck with new everything?
 
Am5 is DDR5 and a new socket/ boards the works. So a totally new platform all around. Or am I totally missing your question?
 
sfsuphysics said:
Out of curiosity will this new architecture only support ddr4? Or will it do ddr4. I mean I get not the same on a single motherboard but are you going to be stuck with new everything?
Click to expand...
TheHig said:
Am5 is DDR5 and a new socket/ boards the works. So a totally new platform all around. Or am I totally missing your question?
Click to expand...


This is my understanding as well. fives all around.

AM5, DDR5, PCIe Gen 5.

You will need a new CPU, new motherboard, and new DDR5 RAM.

Luckily PCIe by design is backwards compatible, so no worry there.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Out of curiosity will this new architecture only support ddr4? Or will it do ddr4. I mean I get not the same on a single motherboard but are you going to be stuck with new everything?
Click to expand...

There are rumors that AMD has developed a 7000-series part or parts that are AM4-compatible, but I'm not sure if AMD actually plans to produce any parts. There have also been rumors of DDR4 AM5 boards.

I really don't expect to see either, but who knows. If AMD produces either they'll lock in a lot of loyalty, but at the cost of a window of opportunity in terms of market domination.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
This is my understanding as well. fives all around.

AM5, DDR5, PCIe Gen 5.

You will need a new CPU, new motherboard, and new DDR5 RAM.

Luckily PCIe by design is backwards compatible, so no worry there.
Click to expand...


and most importantly.. no need to worry about bent pins on your shiny new CPU... just have to worry about all those bent/smashed pins in the motherboard socket

🤣
 
This got me wondering and from Noctua’s website:

“In short, all Noctua coolers and mounting kits that support AM4 are upwards compatible with socket AM5, except the NH-L9a-AM4 and the NM-AM4-L9aL9i.

All Noctua AM4 mountings except the ones of the NH-L9a-AM4 and the NM-AM4-L9aL9i attach to the threads of the standard AM4 stock backplate. Since these backplate threads and their pattern are identical on AM4 and AM5, our AM4 mountings that attach to the standard AMD backplate also support AM5.

This means that all SE-AM4 models as well as all Noctua multi-socket coolers purchased since 01/2019 already support socket AM5. Multi-socket coolers purchased before this date that have already been upgraded to AM4 using the NM-AM4 or NM-AM4-UxS kits also require no further upgrades. Older multi-socket coolers that have been purchased before 2019 and have not yet been upgraded to AM4 can be made compatible with AM5 using the NM-AM4 or NM-AM4-UxS upgrade kits.”

This is fantastic really.
 
TheHig said:
This got me wondering and from Noctua’s website:

“In short, all Noctua coolers and mounting kits that support AM4 are upwards compatible with socket AM5, except the NH-L9a-AM4 and the NM-AM4-L9aL9i.

All Noctua AM4 mountings except the ones of the NH-L9a-AM4 and the NM-AM4-L9aL9i attach to the threads of the standard AM4 stock backplate. Since these backplate threads and their pattern are identical on AM4 and AM5, our AM4 mountings that attach to the standard AMD backplate also support AM5.

This means that all SE-AM4 models as well as all Noctua multi-socket coolers purchased since 01/2019 already support socket AM5. Multi-socket coolers purchased before this date that have already been upgraded to AM4 using the NM-AM4 or NM-AM4-UxS kits also require no further upgrades. Older multi-socket coolers that have been purchased before 2019 and have not yet been upgraded to AM4 can be made compatible with AM5 using the NM-AM4 or NM-AM4-UxS upgrade kits.”

This is fantastic really.
Click to expand...
i also know that msi have thier aios instructions labeled am3/4/5, i just a p360 into an intel system and saw it in there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top