New Ryzen 2 (Pinnacle Ridge) gets only 200 MHz boost according to a leak

R

Rakanoth

n00b
Joined
Oct 6, 2017
Messages
48
The Ryzen 5 2600, with codename ZD2600BBM68AF_38/34_Y in the SANDRA database, is meant to replace 1st generation Ryzen 5 1600. It has 6 physical cores and 12 threads, and based on the codename, is clocked at 3.4GHz (base) to 3.8GHz (boost). The upcoming chip also features 16MB of L3 cache and 3MB of L2 cache, along with a 65W TDP.
Click to expand...

https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-5-2600-12nm-zen-cpu-asus-crosshair-vii-hero-x470-motherboard

If this leak is true, I will stay away from AMD forever and ever. I will sell my Ryzen 1700 right away. Sorry AMD.
 
Last edited:
That's just one chip. We haven't seen the other clocks yet. 200Mhz ain't much but it's the first stepping so you never know.
 
kirbyrj said:
That doesn't make any sense. You're going to sell your last generation product and give up on a company because it "only" has a 200mhz clock speed bump?

Plus this isn't Zen2, this is Zen+
Click to expand...

Yeah it does seem a bit feeble minded to be honest the equivalent on the extra 100 mhz per core boost is so small and it requires good cooling solution and that the process might be holding it back from doing better it is nothing to get upset about.

You are right that the bigger step should come from Zen2 with 7nm production process.
 
It's an ES, so there may be more of an improvement yet.
Also what exactly were you expecting from a refresh? It's the same as with Devil's Canyon/Kaby Lake - you get few hundred extra Mhz, nothing major enough to warrant an upgrade.
 
this is more of a 'tock' release, isn't it? i think amd mentioned it would be something like 10% more performance, if they can squeeze out 10% more from just a 200mhz boost, thats pretty good to me
 
stashix said:
It's an ES, so there may be more of an improvement yet.
Also what exactly were you expecting from a refresh? It's the same as with Devil's Canyon/Kaby Lake - you get few hundred extra Mhz, nothing major enough to warrant an upgrade.
Click to expand...
gigaxtreme1 said:
That's just one chip. We haven't seen the other clocks yet. 200Mhz ain't much but it's the first stepping so you never know.
Click to expand...
It might be a bit of both but people are expecting miracles from each upgrade and with the 12nm process could work well but headroom the process has to offer might not be as big as people expect it to be.
illli said:
this is more of a 'tock' release, isn't it? i think amd mentioned it would be something like 10% more performance, if they can squeeze out 10% more from just a 200mhz boost, thats pretty good to me
Click to expand...
https://www.globalfoundries.com/new...-technology-for-high-performance-applications

That is the process :)
 
illli said:
this is more of a 'tock' release, isn't it? i think amd mentioned it would be something like 10% more performance, if they can squeeze out 10% more from just a 200mhz boost, thats pretty good to me
Click to expand...

pretty much.. just cleaning up the process issues that 14nm had.. i'll be interested to see if any numbers pop up for the 95w 2600x. given the current clocks for the 1600x 3.6 vs 3.2 for the 1600.. that would put the 2600x some where around 3.8Ghz base 4.2Ghz boost if the scaling is the same with the 12nm process. if that ends up being the case i wouldn't mind being able to overclock all cores to 4.2Ghz as long as you can reach it reliably unlike the 4Ghz barrier we currently have. 200mhz across 12/16 threads is still pretty significant performance increase for people that can take advantage of them.

but yeah while i'm not going to rage sell my current setup, i might be more likely to wait til the price is better to upgrade to a 2600/2600x from my 1600. given the price war that happened within current ryzen i lost out big time upgrading early.
 
Speaking of Ryzen - My brother is due for an upgrade, I'm leaning towards AMD this time around (i5 8400 is another option, arguably faster for games, but completely out of stock for about two months now plus the whole Meltdown/Spectre thing).
Can't really decide if I should get him a 1600 or 1600x, it's sort of unlikely he'll overclock so the higher out of the box frequencies could be handy. Price difference ATM is ~25€.
 
stashix said:
Speaking of Ryzen - My brother is due for an upgrade, I'm leaning towards AMD this time around (i5 8400 is another option, arguably faster for games, but completely out of stock for about two months now plus the whole Meltdown/Spectre thing).
Can't really decide if I should get him a 1600 or 1600x, it's sort of unlikely he'll overclock so the higher out of the box frequencies could be handy. Price difference ATM is ~25€.
Click to expand...

Start a new thread or look up https://hardforum.com/threads/fx-8350-to-ryzen-5-1600x-worth-it.1952166/
 
Let's hope the newer processes will lift the overclocking ceiling so we can really push these chips..
 
_mockingbird said:
This is speculation pushed by OP.

For comparison, QS samples of Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G only ran at 3.0/3.3 GHz and 3.3/3.5 GHz respectively.

ZD3000C5M4MFB_33/30_Y

ZD3300C5M4MFB_35/33_Y
Click to expand...

And in the other hand, QS of R7 1700X and 1800X all ran at final clocks 3.4/3.8GHz and 3.6/4.0GHz respectively.

ZD3406BAM88F4_38/34_Y
ZD3601BAM88F4_40/36_Y
 
_mockingbird said:
This is speculation pushed by OP.

For comparison, QS samples of Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G only ran at 3.0/3.3 GHz and 3.3/3.5 GHz respectively.

ZD3000C5M4MFB_33/30_Y

ZD3300C5M4MFB_35/33_Y
Click to expand...

yeah completely forgot about that, lol.
 
Dan_D said:
I figured this would be an incremental upgrade at best. I'm more interested in X470 and why it's getting a new chipset. This isn't normal for AMD.
Click to expand...
Wondering if this is an attempt by AMD to keep motherboard manufacturer happy this time around.
 
Brackle said:
Anyone who bitches about a 200mhz upgrade on processors, needs to make a thread in the Intel forum about the 6700k to 7700k.........Trolls ftl.
Click to expand...
No lies told in this post....still haven't moved off my 6600k..lol

Dan_D said:
I figured this would be an incremental upgrade at best. I'm more interested in X470 and why it's getting a new chipset. This isn't normal for AMD.
Click to expand...
You and me both. I thought it was always assumed that this would be a "tock" release, so I wasn't expecting anything too major regarding clock speed but I'm really interested in what all the new chipset is bringing and hoping one company makes a x470 board with 2 legacy PCI slots.
 
Brackle said:
Anyone who bitches about a 200mhz upgrade on processors, needs to make a thread in the Intel forum about the 6700k to 7700k.........Trolls ftl.
Click to expand...

Or even worse, try the Xeon E5-2600 series it goes backwards sometimes.
For example:
E5-2667 v2 8c 3.3 GHz (Turbo 4.0)
E5-2667 v3 / v4 8c 3.2 GHz (Turbo 3.6)
 
I feel like realistic expectations were 300Mhz tops, so this shouldn't really surprise anyone.
 
juanrga said:
And in the other hand, QS of R7 1700X and 1800X all ran at final clocks 3.4/3.8GHz and 3.6/4.0GHz respectively.

ZD3406BAM88F4_38/34_Y
ZD3601BAM88F4_40/36_Y
Click to expand...

There were many qualification samples.

No conclusion can be made until we see the final products.

Your statements "It is a qualification sample. Clocks must be surely final." are clearly wrong.
 
_mockingbird said:
There were many qualification samples.

No conclusion can be made until we see the final products.

Your statements "It is a qualification sample. Clocks must be surely final." are clearly wrong.
Click to expand...

Leaving apart that I mentioned CPU samples whereas you mentioned APU samples, usually a qualification sample has exactly the same specs than the final chip, because the sample is used to test motherboards and other stuff. So it is more probable those are final clocks. I am using "must be" in its standard sense of "is very probable". So, my statements aren't wrong.
 
Dan_D said:
I figured this would be an incremental upgrade at best. I'm more interested in X470 and why it's getting a new chipset. This isn't normal for AMD.
Click to expand...

The preview or whatever of the X470 board i just looked at claims 2nd gen ryzen CPUs can be supported on 300 series boards with a bios update..

blah blah better power efficiency / memory support w/ the X470 but not necessarily required to run rzyen+
 
juanrga said:
Leaving apart that I mentioned CPU samples whereas you mentioned APU samples, usually a qualification sample has exactly the same specs than the final chip, because the sample is used to test motherboards and other stuff. So it is more probable those are final clocks. I am using "must be" in its standard sense of "is very probable". So, my statements aren't wrong.
Click to expand...

Please go to the Intel forum and make a very negative post about Intel's 200mhz upgrade from the 6700k to 7700k. Otherwise you need to stay out of thread that you troll constantly.
 
juanrga said:
Leaving apart that I mentioned CPU samples whereas you mentioned APU samples, usually a qualification sample has exactly the same specs than the final chip, because the sample is used to test motherboards and other stuff. So it is more probable those are final clocks. I am using "must be" in its standard sense of "is very probable". So, my statements aren't wrong.
Click to expand...

Not true. Engineering samples come out in phases which are sent to different groups for different reasons. Reviewers like myself don't usually get Engineering Samples that don't represent final silicon. However, OEMs who need to do testing and hardware validation will get various stages of silicon throughout the development process. It is probable that those are the final clocks, but only because the rumored release date isn't that far off.

Brackle said:
Please go to the Intel forum and make a very negative post about Intel's 200mhz upgrade from the 6700k to 7700k. Otherwise you need to stay out of thread that you troll constantly.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget all the times in the last 7 years where Intel gave us a new chip with higher IPC that had 200MHz LESS overclocking headroom which made any IPC gains a moot point.
 
Dan_D said:
Not true. Engineering samples come out in phases which are sent to different groups for different reasons. Reviewers like myself don't usually get Engineering Samples that don't represent final silicon. However, OEMs who need to do testing and hardware validation will get various stages of silicon throughout the development process. It is probable that those are the final clocks, but only because the rumored release date isn't that far off.



Let's not forget all the times in the last 7 years where Intel gave us a new chip with higher IPC that had 200MHz LESS overclocking headroom which made any IPC gains a moot point.
Click to expand...

I am still a bit salty about my "upgrade" from a rock solid 2700k at 4.8 to a 4770k that gets pissy if you try to run 4.3 . I must admit, the 4770K works just fine with a 1080ti 4 years later, and I doubt the 2700k would still be this healthy.

Upgrade itch, must scratch, It's been entirely too long, and 5+ghz on an 8700k sounds nice. I wanted a 1700x but the single thread perf isn't much of an improvement and the game I play the most is basically constrained to no more than 2 cores, and still really only stresses one (World of Warcraft).

I'm hoping the zen+ 1700x equivalent can get up to 4.5, if so I will be sold on it.
 
Dan_D said:
I figured this would be an incremental upgrade at best. I'm more interested in X470 and why it's getting a new chipset. This isn't normal for AMD.
Click to expand...

maybe new features, maybe something like a Thunderbolt type tech, or they are using X470 as a precursor to Zen2
 
Rakanoth said:
https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-5-2600-12nm-zen-cpu-asus-crosshair-vii-hero-x470-motherboard

If this leak is true, I will stay away from AMD forever and ever. I will sell my Ryzen 1700 right away. Sorry AMD.
Click to expand...

upload_2018-1-19_7-53-41.jpeg
 
It seems about right, on the clocks and turbo more or less what was expected. What will be interesting is the power numbers and overclocking headroom (not personally but for the collective, I don't have any intent to overclock).

Hypothetical scores on more linear benches:

3.4Ghz Base, 3.6Ghz All core, 3.8Ghz max turbo.

Cinebench ST: 157
Cinebench MT: 1204
~2% moe


That is a 5.4% uplift in MT and 5.2% uplift in ST baselines off the Ryzen 5 1600, the power will become interesting if it is less than the 1600 which already sips power it will be a nice upgrade for non ryzen or say kabylake users. For SR/Kaby users this is not really the upgrade you will be looking at.
 
Briguyatx said:
I am still a bit salty about my "upgrade" from a rock solid 2700k at 4.8 to a 4770k that gets pissy if you try to run 4.3 . I must admit, the 4770K works just fine with a 1080ti 4 years later, and I doubt the 2700k would still be this healthy.

Upgrade itch, must scratch, It's been entirely too long, and 5+ghz on an 8700k sounds nice. I wanted a 1700x but the single thread perf isn't much of an improvement and the game I play the most is basically constrained to no more than 2 cores, and still really only stresses one (World of Warcraft).

I'm hoping the zen+ 1700x equivalent can get up to 4.5, if so I will be sold on it.
Click to expand...
My wife still plays WoW a lot and her stock 1600 plays great with a 75Hz ultra-wide. That at 3.4 all core and maybe occasionally touching 3.6 on a single core. Also that little 1600 of hers impresses me every day more than my 4.0Ghz 1800X.
 
if amd want to sell to me i want ipc/clocks improvement. im all after increased performance in gaming beyond core count. but it's nice to see AMD back in the game. before recently all my rigs were exclusively AMD and radeon graphics cards. i hope to see that day again, i have way more sympathy for AMD then intel. and intel ironically enough can contribute their succes in some way to AMD. funny enough :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top