AMD Stock? Ryzen appears to be a winner

What extra PCI Express lanes do you think you have on your Haswell/Z87 board over the Ryzen/X370 (Hint, there are 4 less lanes on the Z87 chipset.)
 
dook43 said:
What extra PCI Express lanes do you think you have on your Haswell/Z87 board over the Ryzen/X370 (Hint, there are 4 less lanes on the Z87 chipset.)
Click to expand...

touché - - I stand corrected. I remembered that wrong.

Still, benchies show the 4790k and 4770k overclocked hanging tight with the Ryzen on real world stuff (and the Ryzen apparently doesn't overclock terribly well). That's disappointing after all the hype build up. Maybe it's just me - but reading about the world record being set with a Ryzen chip - all the pomp and circumstance about it rivaling the 6900k etc --

Just doesn't seem to have the same shine today after the NDA was lifted, unfortunately. I was rooting for this to be a success by the way.

Looked at the trigger price on my 15% trailing stop and it was $13.33. I decided to manually sell -- sold at like $14.12.

I'm out.

Good luck guys. If it dips down too low again in the next few weeks I might buy more. I don't think this is a flop - I just don't think it's the product I was personally expecting.
 
Last edited:
Archaea said:
3.5 year old overclocked I7 4770K at 4.5Ghz is faster for most purposes than a new Ryzen chip. (and my extra PCI-E lanes are appreciated since I have two fury X cards in crossfire).
Click to expand...

You make up less than 1% of the gaming PC market.


This thing could be a beast in data center and workstation space, which is a pretty big space. Extremely promising from AMD today.
 
I think some of you gents are missing the point as it equates to AMD's long term survival (because yeah without this they were nothing more than an IP repository and a fringe custom chip builder) . I for one, never expected Ryzen to dethrone Intel in the gaming arena or even in IPC... they as much as said they weren't going to once they announced that IPC number and we had a rough idea of their initial clock speeds. I mean , if you did hope for that you were only kidding yourself.

What we got was a solid basis for the range of products going forward. There's nothing wrong with the performance of these cores at the frequencies offered. That's the benchmark. When we see 32 core server chips and 4 core APU's based on this platform launch, things are actually going to be reasonably competitive especially since AMD seems interested in taking a solid pricing initiative. 4cores of this at 2.5ish Ghz with 600-800 vega shaders would make a pretty nice HTPC or laptop at 1080.

As far as I'm concerned, once you put the bullshit from the over hyped AMD fan boys aside, they delivered. The trolls don't detract from the fact they finally have some kind of a decent foundation of CPU cores to move forward with. The overall energy use pattern in the mainstream 1700 looks decent enough too.

Basically I think they delivered and I think it bodes well for their potential* (just because they're able doesn't mean they can execute) to pull some decent market share off Intel over the next couple of years when the full spectrum of products based on Zen gets to market.

This is exactly what I wanted and expected to see, a minor price blip here or there because of lukewarm gaming numbers couldn't mean less to me. In the end I'll sit on what shares I have and wait it out for a few years. There's enough decent potential upside to make it worth the gamble (I think the implied odds and pot odds are there in other words).
 
I also think that Ryzen is a solid beginning for the future. The bests and more profitable AMD products will arrive later.
 
That these Ryzen R7 processor (8 cores / 16 Threads) are not ideal for gaming was evident for each technical guy. If you look in the Linux side (phoronix.com), the guys are excited with the 1800X performance.
 
Wshmaster0 said:
For an 8C 16T at less than $500 for latest gen? You must have a Delorean and a friend named Biff
Click to expand...

Show me a bunch of game titles where the Ryzen with it's 8C easily bests a 4.5Ghz I7 from haswell or newer?

Since the 4770k was released in Q2, 2013 --- yes, 4 years ago.
http://ark.intel.com/products/75123/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_90-GHz


Not only that - but I've seen benchmarks were a Sandy Bridge overclocked to 4.5Ghz is keeping pace with the Ryzen CPUs in typical real world games and tasks (not synthetic benchmarks).

If you've read my posts you'll understand I get it that if something requires 8 cores --- it is advantageous -- my point is most enthusiasts stuff doesn't require 8 cores (right now). Talk about the less than 1%.
 
Archaea said:
If you've read my posts you'll understand I get it that if something requires 8 cores --- it is advantageous -- my point is most enthusiasts stuff doesn't require 8 cores (right now). Talk about the less than 1%.
Click to expand...

But this thread is about stock price and I don't think AMD disappointing the top 1% of PC gamers is going to stop a decent amount of corporate growth based on this core which does a lot of things quite well.

I figured this launch was do or die. So they did "do". I was ready for either. They delivered what they promised re: IPC and price, I'm not worried.
 
Simplyfun said:
But this thread is about stock price and I don't think AMD disappointing the top 1% of PC gamers is going to stop a decent amount of corporate growth based on this core which does a lot of things quite well.

I figured this launch was do or die. So they did "do". I was ready for either. They delivered what they promised re: IPC and price, I'm not worried.
Click to expand...

That's jumping the gun somewhat. This isn't even their server CPU line yet.

I've not read much on their server line yet. So far all this is about the desktop/consumer CPU. If the server line comes out strong at half the price it'll be a good thing - but in a world of 32 core Xeons and such --- this 8 core Ryzen isn't even on the playing field. Since AMD has a whopping .2% of the server market CPU chips right now --- their main bread and butter (feeding stock price) is not necessary server CPU related --- but - sure it could be if it introduces well - has more core variants available, is power efficient, and priced right. It's a whole different ballgame for the server realm. Ram utilization, quad channel etc - all come into play. PCI-E lanes being needed for Fiber Channel cards etc -- This desktop Ryzen CPU is a toy by comparison to what the big boys need.
 
Archaea said:
That's jumping the gun somewhat. This isn't even their server CPU line yet.
Ram utilization, quad channel etc - all come into play. PCI-E lanes being needed for Fiber Channel cards etc -- This desktop Ryzen CPU is a toy by comparison to what the big boys need.
Click to expand...

Oh I hear you, but all the things that you mentioned are built on a foundation, and this Ryzen intro was our first glimpse of that. I'm pretty happy with how the individual cores come off and how the new energy management features work. Since the only thing people were disappointed about was gaming (which doesn't matter at all for servers) I'm not seeing a huge problem ... yet. Ians review on anandtech gave a balanced non gaming review and some of the Linux fans are loving it so far.

AMD isn't new to servers, this isn't like some hole in the wall ARM licensee trying to break into a market they don't know.

I'm a gambler, and I like the flop. I might get screwed on the river, but I believe I am getting my money in good. But in point of fact, I'm not going all in. Who knows what Intel's actual hole cards are.
 
Archaea said:
Show me a bunch of game titles where the Ryzen with it's 8C easily bests a 4.5Ghz I7 from haswell or newer?

Since the 4770k was released in Q2, 2013 --- yes, 4 years ago.
http://ark.intel.com/products/75123/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_90-GHz


Not only that - but I've seen benchmarks were a Sandy Bridge overclocked to 4.5Ghz is keeping pace with the Ryzen CPUs in typical real world games and tasks (not synthetic benchmarks).

If you've read my posts you'll understand I get it that if something requires 8 cores --- it is advantageous -- my point is most enthusiasts stuff doesn't require 8 cores (right now). Talk about the less than 1%.
Click to expand...

its not all about your 1080p games. Seriously I am hearing enough about this games stuff. It does more than fine on games and it matches up in everything else. How is that a fail? Get real, let people purchase what they want and stop shoving it down their throat. give me a game where intel does 144fps for those 144hz montiors across the board at 1080p. You won't tell much from 95 fps vs 120.
 
Iching said:
If I read another shit post about the greatness of 1080p I'm going to report it for trolling.
Click to expand...
I actually run my 1080p screen at 480p extrapolated because it's 1080p 200Hz and if I quad extrapolate it I can see things four times faster by quadrupling the extrapolated 480p resolution and synchronously updating pixels, it makes me better because I'm world championship at CS like everyone else on 1080p tr3u 1337 ][4xx0rz #480p#YOLO

Thank you for your valuable insight in this thread though.
 
My Take after reading for a day...

It's not bad. It's not an Intel killer. But it's not bad.

It's also not enough to make me go out and upgrade. I'm not even close to maxing out my main box. If it had been in line with the hype- I would have bit.

So I think, from my perspective, it's a good time to wait a year and see what the next revision brings. Or watch revisions to the proc driver and windows scheduler.

They did a good job. But I'd not upgrade with this performance showing. It's not enough to coax my credit card into mating season....
 
N4CR said:
I actually run my 1080p screen at 480p extrapolated because it's 1080p 200Hz and if I quad extrapolate it I can see things four times faster by quadrupling the extrapolated 480p resolution and synchronously updating pixels, it makes me better because I'm world championship at CS like everyone else on 1080p tr3u 1337 ][4xx0rz #480p#YOLO

Thank you for your valuable insight in this thread though.
Click to expand...


I approve it. :):D
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
The benchmarks do not look promising as many hoped they would. I was not expecting anything stellar personally. In any event, pre-sale order numbers should be interesting.
I usually play the long game too. Getting in during the low single digits like some of you would have been great but I missed that train. Decided to play the Ryzen hype with July 14 calls. Did not have the guts to play March strikes. Auto buy at 1.25. Majority sold at 2.80 on tuesday. The rest set for $3 did not sell. Gap between bid and ask was large that day.
 
AMD will be re-added on March 20th to the S&P. Buy calls and sell puts on the dip. I did today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top