AMD to Host Livestream Event to Unveil Next Generation Ryzen Processors August 29th Monday

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
6,453
Well, AMD has borrowed Intel's strategies in other areas (no boxed cooler, stagnant SKU progression), and as far as I know, there has been NO promise of AM5 forward-support like AMD promised with AM4 in 2017.
They have gone on record stating that they intend to support the platform until at least 2025.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,625
They have gone on record stating that they intend to support the platform until at least 2025.
If so, then I'm mistaken and am sorry for spreading false information.

I'll try to find where they said this, but... some help?
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
8,162
If so, then I'm mistaken and am sorry for spreading false information.

I'll try to find where they said this, but... some help?
I think it was the engineer stating it, and then the slide in the background of him.
 

alxlwson

You Know Where I Live
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
8,688
hope they release processors below that $300 price point in the future
Oh you can count on it. Just not something they bring up during platform launch.
Akin to C8 Corvette launch and folks screaming about some 3cyl mini something. Not target market
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
6,111
So Intel:
is increasing core counts each generation
has the threaded advantage
has the cheaper platform
has the Price per SKU advantage
Has options for budget systems with cheap but fast enough i3 level SKUs
but has slightly SLIGHTLY slower single thread speed.


and now AMD:
Hasn't increased core counts for three generations
is raising prices on most of it's parts
Has a new, expensive platform.


So this is reversed roles of Ryzen first-gen vs 7th gen Core all over again.

My, how quickly did AMD sit on their throne and pull out their dick to auction off sucking privileges.
With Intel, you can also use DDR4 on Alder and Raptor Lake.

DDR5 pricing has dropped a lot. Its pretty decent, now. But still, you can drop your DDR4 into a 12th/13th gen Intel build and not lose much performance, overall.
 

TheSlySyl

2[H]4U
Joined
May 30, 2018
Messages
2,277
Not planning on upgrding to AM5 anytime soon, I got my 5950X so that my AM4 will last me a couple more years. But I can't wait to see what the real benchmarks are like and I might want to upgrade when the 8000 series (9000, whatever they call it) launch. Especially if they use 3Dcache and yet still maintain high core counts.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,790
So Intel:
is increasing core counts each generation
has the threaded advantage
has the cheaper platform
has the Price per SKU advantage
Has options for budget systems with cheap but fast enough i3 level SKUs
but has slightly SLIGHTLY slower single thread speed.


and now AMD:
Hasn't increased core counts for three generations
is raising prices on most of it's parts
Has a new, expensive platform.


So this is reversed roles of Ryzen first-gen vs 7th gen Core all over again.

My, how quickly did AMD sit on their throne and pull out their dick to auction off sucking privileges.
Not really... Intels core count increase are not real cores. The cut down extra cores are not really doing anything much for real performance. Intel draws 2-3x the power vs Zen3 under even a small load... and Zen4 is going to be even more efficient.

More cores are good... but not the only way to increased performance. When intel was stuck at 4 cores... for years of course it mattered going to 8. Going from 16 to 24 ? Not really going to matter much 99% of the time. If Intel really does does drop the gauntlet with a 24 core rocket lake chip that is a clear winner over the 16 core Ryzen.... AMD could always revive threadripper, or drop a 3Dcache SKU... or I assume they could technically add one more chiplet for a 24 core part if the MOBOs are capable of pushing the required power. AMD is claiming they are going to easily win in single threaded performance... and as much as we go on about multi threaded software, the simple fact most multi threaded software is threading minor things... heavy calculation is still almost always relying on single thread speeds cause it can't easily be broken up. There comes a point where threading software doesn't gain you much anymore. 16 cores with 32 threads is pretty much that point for single user environments.

These are going to outperform Intels current chips. Intels rocket lake is a refresh part... so we'll see if a refresh is enough to pull back even with AMD and Zen4.
 

realworld

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
462
7600x and 7700x are going to be terrible values. 7950x is surprisingly cheaper than expected---$100 less than 5950x, and this is the case because many are expecting a 3D V-Cache model to take up that price point between $800-$900. If I were to build a highend AM5 system, I would wait for the 7950X3D or whatever it'll be called over the 7950x.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,790
7600x and 7700x are going to be terrible values. 7950x is surprisingly cheaper than expected---$100 less than 5950x, and this is the case because many are expecting a 3D V-Cache model to take up that price point between $800-$900. If I were to build a highend AM5 system, I would wait for the 7950X3D or whatever it'll be called over the 7950x.
I agree on the 7600x...
The 7700x though might be a nice in on AM5... with an eye to upgrading it down the road around the 8000s.

I think I'm going to hold for this gen... If the worst happens though my system explodes. lol I could see myself buying a decent 670 board popping a 7700x in... then upgrading it later buying a B650 (or 750 later) upgrading myself and migrating the 7700x to a "new" machine for the wife. Knock on wood my current rig should have another few years in it. lol
 

Lakados

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
6,453
If so, then I'm mistaken and am sorry for spreading false information.

I'll try to find where they said this, but... some help?
“We’ve built the platform around next-generation technologies so you can build today and upgrade over time as your needs grow,” AMD’s David McAfee explained at today’s event. “And, just like AM4, we’re committed to supporting the AM5 platform with new technologies and next-generation architectures at least through 2025. We’re really excited about the next era of desktop growth with AM5.”
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,896
Now just waiting to see motherboard prices. 7700X seems good to me, but will probably wait for a sale. I'm sure we'll see it around $360 or so eventually.
 

///AMG

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
3,742
I could be tempted to get an AM5 system just to play with the 4090. That 7950x looks like a good value.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,625
Not really... Intels core count increase are not real cores. The cut down extra cores are not really doing anything much for real performance. Intel draws 2-3x the power vs Zen3 under even a small load... and Zen4 is going to be even more efficient.

More cores are good... but not the only way to increased performance. When intel was stuck at 4 cores... for years of course it mattered going to 8. Going from 16 to 24 ? Not really going to matter much 99% of the time. If Intel really does does drop the gauntlet with a 24 core rocket lake chip that is a clear winner over the 16 core Ryzen.... AMD could always revive threadripper, or drop a 3Dcache SKU... or I assume they could technically add one more chiplet for a 24 core part if the MOBOs are capable of pushing the required power. AMD is claiming they are going to easily win in single threaded performance... and as much as we go on about multi threaded software, the simple fact most multi threaded software is threading minor things... heavy calculation is still almost always relying on single thread speeds cause it can't easily be broken up. There comes a point where threading software doesn't gain you much anymore. 16 cores with 32 threads is pretty much that point for single user environments.

These are going to outperform Intels current chips. Intels rocket lake is a refresh part... so we'll see if a refresh is enough to pull back even with AMD and Zen4.

Intel's multi-core perf has AMD beat per-SKU. i7 beats Ryzen 7, because those little cores, while not great, are still cores, and still allow an MT workload to be further broken up. Meanwhile the ST performance of Zen 4 as presented by AMD is within single-digit percent of Intel's current-gen chips.

Yes, Intel is using more power. And has been since Zen2, yet their notebooks still have faster gaming performance, and with 12 gen, have huge MT performance advantages as well. I still like AMD for battery life, but even with Ryzen 6000 series mobile, it is not a clear victory.

Rocket Lake is rumoured to double ECore count. This will be a HUGE boost to MT performance where AMD usually has the advantage. And if Rocket lake increases ST performance by even a tiny, tiny bit: talking single-digit percent: They beat AMD with a clean sweep. The ONLY thing AMD will have is efficiency, which Enthusiasts ONLY care about when their team has it.
 

Ranulfo

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
3,107
7600x and 7700x are going to be terrible values. 7950x is surprisingly cheaper than expected---$100 less than 5950x, and this is the case because many are expecting a 3D V-Cache model to take up that price point between $800-$900. If I were to build a highend AM5 system, I would wait for the 7950X3D or whatever it'll be called over the 7950x.

I think the prices are what they are to let AMD lower prices if need by in the next few months. A $50 difference is an upsell tease to get people to buy the 8core 7700x instead of the 6 core.
 

Tamlin_WSGF

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
3,069
Intel's multi-core perf has AMD beat per-SKU. i7 beats Ryzen 7, because those little cores, while not great, are still cores, and still allow an MT workload to be further broken up. Meanwhile the ST performance of Zen 4 as presented by AMD is within single-digit percent of Intel's current-gen chips.

Yes, Intel is using more power. And has been since Zen2, yet their notebooks still have faster gaming performance, and with 12 gen, have huge MT performance advantages as well. I still like AMD for battery life, but even with Ryzen 6000 series mobile, it is not a clear victory.

Rocket Lake is rumoured to double ECore count. This will be a HUGE boost to MT performance where AMD usually has the advantage. And if Rocket lake increases ST performance by even a tiny, tiny bit: talking single-digit percent: They beat AMD with a clean sweep. The ONLY thing AMD will have is efficiency, which Enthusiasts ONLY care about when their team has it.
I disagree from my perspective looking to upgrade to a new platform. Besides sudden need of an extra computer a few years ago (prebuild with AMD 3600) and a recent purchase of an HP Envy laptop for testing HoloIso (just for fun), I have only used Intel CPUs since good old Athlon days. For GPUs, its only been Nvidia since GTX 1080 launch due to VR (Before that a mix of AMD and Nvidia gpus).

This time around I am really leaning towards AMD. Only AMDs 105W parts though (7700X in particular, perhaps wait for their X3D CPUS). Intels 12000 series issues put me off buying it, though most of these things have been solved since launch. E cores conflicting with DRM in games, bad mounting pressure on CPU due to design and high power usage (in terms of cooling/noise balance in my case). Intel have pretty much resolved DRM issues, I can buy extra shit to even mounting and can afford high end cooling.

But, with AMD I don´t have to. I get all "P cores", hopefully not a shitty mounting pressure on AM5, better thermals and noise and it does everything I need. In addition, AMD have already advertised 2025+ support for their platform.

I have a light workload with only occasionally harder workloads. The rest is gaming. I want PCI-e 5 mostly for storage (due to DirectX directstorage for fun and more NVME storage on motherboard in general). And of course getting a faster CPU, but thats duable on PCI-E 4 platforms. There are many of us with the same type of workload.

What can Intel offer that gives me a noticeable difference compared to AMD this time around other then potentially more heat and noise in my room, not to mention potentially lower lifetime when it comes to upgrades on the same platform? I am really asking, since I am due for a platform upgrade and not biased in any way here. :)
 

OFaceSIG

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
3,518
I am not a fan of Alder lake. I don't like the split core design and the inefficiency. I know they are on top but it seems very "eff it, win at all costs" type of situation. AMD is very good and don't have a split core design. I do believe unfortunately split cores are inevitable to keep ARM at bay but I don't like it now. Maybe because Windows 11 the only way to officially support it, and I friggin dislike 11 so much.

I think just like Ryzen 6000 is a hell of a platform for mobile. I think Ryzen 7k is a very good evolution from 5000. We'll see if it's enough to meet or beat Alder lake. Only time and real benchmarks will tell.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,357
All of the leaks from yesterday morning seem to have been spot-on, so there were no surprises. I'm still interested to see what Rocket Lake brings to the table. I didn't see anything to make me think this is going to kick Intel's ass so much as it should be better at certain things and the platform will be around longer.
I'll have to do some research on the various mainstream motherboards to see which ones have the stuff I want without costing a fortune. Ditto with DDR5 RAM sticks and the supposed "sweet spot" that AMD stuff will have.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,127
Intel's multi-core perf has AMD beat per-SKU. i7 beats Ryzen 7, because those little cores, while not great, are still cores, and still allow an MT workload to be further broken up. Meanwhile the ST performance of Zen 4 as presented by AMD is within single-digit percent of Intel's current-gen chips.

Yes, Intel is using more power. And has been since Zen2, yet their notebooks still have faster gaming performance, and with 12 gen, have huge MT performance advantages as well. I still like AMD for battery life, but even with Ryzen 6000 series mobile, it is not a clear victory.

Rocket Lake is rumoured to double ECore count. This will be a HUGE boost to MT performance where AMD usually has the advantage. And if Rocket lake increases ST performance by even a tiny, tiny bit: talking single-digit percent: They beat AMD with a clean sweep. The ONLY thing AMD will have is efficiency, which Enthusiasts ONLY care about when their team has it.

I could care less about efficiency cores, I want my chip with full performance cores and I dont have any need for more then 16 of them and even then thats a bit overkill for my needs. Unless Intel gets a handle on their power demands they can't afford to add more performance cores. I am more concerned about the continuing price creep on everything, as that is likely to due far more harm to the pc market then anything else, as people won't upgrade if they can't afford it.
 

Randall Stephens

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 3, 2017
Messages
1,490
I think AMD will wind up with E cores down the road, but for now, TSMC has helped them out with superior process nodes compared to Intel that they don't need to play that game yet. I don't like that the TDPs have gone up this round, that will make an ITX build tougher, but we're still not talking Intel Easy Bake levels so we'll have to deal I guess.
 

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
9,658
I could care less about efficiency cores, I want my chip with full performance cores and I dont have any need for more then 16 of them and even then thats a bit overkill for my needs. Unless Intel gets a handle on their power demands they can't afford to add more performance cores. I am more concerned about the continuing price creep on everything, as that is likely to due far more harm to the pc market then anything else, as people won't upgrade if they can't afford it.
While nice Intel can't even get the heat and power under control with E cores. Imagine the furnace if Intel did a 16 P core running at 5ghz.
 

mothman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
5,452
Did I read correctly that all Ryzen 7000 series chips will include integrated graphics of some type ?
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,357
I never thoughts I'd care about integrated graphics until late year. I had to operate sans GPU for about 6 weeks and it was a godsend.
 

CAD4466HK

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,512
Not really... Intels core count increase are not real cores. The cut down extra cores are not really doing anything much for real performance. Intel draws 2-3x the power vs Zen3 under even a small load... and Zen4 is going to be even more efficient.

More cores are good... but not the only way to increased performance. When intel was stuck at 4 cores... for years of course it mattered going to 8. Going from 16 to 24 ? Not really going to matter much 99% of the time. If Intel really does does drop the gauntlet with a 24 core rocket lake chip that is a clear winner over the 16 core Ryzen.... AMD could always revive threadripper, or drop a 3Dcache SKU... or I assume they could technically add one more chiplet for a 24 core part if the MOBOs are capable of pushing the required power. AMD is claiming they are going to easily win in single threaded performance... and as much as we go on about multi threaded software, the simple fact most multi threaded software is threading minor things... heavy calculation is still almost always relying on single thread speeds cause it can't easily be broken up. There comes a point where threading software doesn't gain you much anymore. 16 cores with 32 threads is pretty much that point for single user environments.

These are going to outperform Intels current chips. Intels rocket lake is a refresh part... so we'll see if a refresh is enough to pull back even with AMD and Zen4.

Intel's multi-core perf has AMD beat per-SKU. i7 beats Ryzen 7, because those little cores, while not great, are still cores, and still allow an MT workload to be further broken up. Meanwhile the ST performance of Zen 4 as presented by AMD is within single-digit percent of Intel's current-gen chips.

Yes, Intel is using more power. And has been since Zen2, yet their notebooks still have faster gaming performance, and with 12 gen, have huge MT performance advantages as well. I still like AMD for battery life, but even with Ryzen 6000 series mobile, it is not a clear victory.

Rocket Lake is rumoured to double ECore count. This will be a HUGE boost to MT performance where AMD usually has the advantage. And if Rocket lake increases ST performance by even a tiny, tiny bit: talking single-digit percent: They beat AMD with a clean sweep. The ONLY thing AMD will have is efficiency, which Enthusiasts ONLY care about when their team has it.

All of the leaks from yesterday morning seem to have been spot-on, so there were no surprises. I'm still interested to see what Rocket Lake brings to the table. I didn't see anything to make me think this is going to kick Intel's ass so much as it should be better at certain things and the platform will be around longer.
I'll have to do some research on the various mainstream motherboards to see which ones have the stuff I want without costing a fortune. Ditto with DDR5 RAM sticks and the supposed "sweet spot" that AMD stuff will have.

I had to check the thread date to make sure this wasn't a necro, with all ya'll talking about Rocket Lake with E cores and shit being 13th gen instead of Raptor Lake, I thought I was losing my goddamn mind!
 

Mad[H]atter

Blood Diamond Dealer
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
8,467
So platform support until 2025, while launching the last quarter of 2022, 2 years after the 5950x launched, means they're only guaranteeing 2 CPU generations? This one and the 8xxx series? With maybe some refreshes like the 7800X3D thrown in? Not quite AM4 is it :(
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,357
For the people that bought the first revisions of Zen 3, did you end up upgrading your CPU while keeping the same mobo and/or RAM? I've always been a little curious about upgrade paths since I (usually) end up keeping a CPU/Board/RAM for at least 3 years anyway. By the time I'm ready to get something new, there has been a new platform rolling out anyway.
 

ElementDave

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
363
So platform support until 2025, while launching the last quarter of 2022, 2 years after the 5950x launched, means they're only guaranteeing 2 CPU generations? This one and the 8xxx series? With maybe some refreshes like the 7800X3D thrown in? Not quite AM4 is it :(
The AM5 platform is said to receive support through 2025, which is closer to three years. And that's not a maximum; it could be longer. I think that's reasonable for a consumer platform.
 

wareyore

Hard DC'er of the Month November 2021
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
891
Did anyone hear any of the AMD presenters mention about IGP? I didn't hear it or maybe I missed it yesterday so wondering why they didn't promote it.
Paul's HW mentioned all sku's will have a basic igp, but, just enough to get a display and do some web browsing if you don't have a dgpu. Nothing like the previous igp sku's that allowed some light gaming.

 

causticspill

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
373
For the people that bought the first revisions of Zen 3, did you end up upgrading your CPU while keeping the same mobo and/or RAM? I've always been a little curious about upgrade paths since I (usually) end up keeping a CPU/Board/RAM for at least 3 years anyway. By the time I'm ready to get something new, there has been a new platform rolling out anyway.
Yep, that's me. Started out with a 1700X and an X470 board. Sold the 1700X to a friend and dropped in a 3700X. Now planning on building the kid a rig around the 3700X and upgrading to the 5800X/X3D and trying my best to sit AM5 out.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,357
Paul's HW mentioned all sku's will have a basic igp, but, just enough to get a display and do some web browsing if you don't have a dgpu. Nothing like the previous igp sku's that allowed some light gaming.


No clue how they compare to what Intel has/had, but the Intel UHD Graphics 630 (built into the 8700K) runs most of Adobe CC like a champ. At the very least it's perfectly serviceable for Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Acrobat, Dreamweaver, etc.
 
Top