# Ryzen 3000 Leaks



## Joss (Dec 4, 2018)

Have you guys seen this?


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 4, 2018)

Get ready for the wave of : "hey it's that adored guy again, be real dude who are you kidding". Same guy who got the Rome leaks right before anyone else did.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 5, 2018)

Holy cow!
Now I want my Navi APU.


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 5, 2018)

Considering prices, amd is no different then intel/nvidia...if they have a good product, it will be pricey, about 5-10% more cores or lower price then intel/nvidia counterpart....and trust me, if amd was as big as them, you would all be paying a premium price for their stuff. I see no difference between any of them, and no reason to be a fan of any of them, although I have been less happy with amd products in the past then with intel/nvidia. When they started with unlocking cores, I thought, oh my god, these guys aren't selling cpu's, they're selling potatoes...get 2 for price of one...then the usual child diseases, like incompatibility, and I was like, k, i've seen enough. I'm not trying to slander anyone here, I'm just saying how it is, from my perspective at least. Simply lost confidence in them, but that may change in the future. Ryzen is a big no for me, however I would consider buying their gpu's, since a lot of ati folks still work there.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 5, 2018)

I entirely skipped FX just to avoid those problems.
Plus, I'm as you feel but with Intel and their chipset/socket nonsense.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 5, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Get ready for the wave of : "hey it's that adored guy again, be real dude who are you kidding". Same guy who got the Rome leaks right before anyone else did.


Hes saying the same argument i have been for a few years that it's the Only way forward(chiplets).
Likely even intel Will backpedal from monolithic rapidly in the next few years ,if the real 7nm is this hard to make and we're a ways off that , think of the cost of monolithic 5nm or 3.
Amd read their cards right here , luckily they're all doing modular designs these day's so adoption should be quick.
Add Amd/ intel cross licencing emib and the push to conformalise chiplets and their interfoundry use , could be strange but very interesting times ahead.


----------



## mastershake575 (Dec 5, 2018)

Hope they don't get into a "how many cores can we fit" pissing match with Intel and instead give us what majority of users want (to be honest it's not much, 4-6% increase in IPC along with a 300-350mhz all core increase to the current lineup at similar pricing and it would be great).


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Dec 5, 2018)

Insta-Buy if AMD can pull this off. 

Seriously!


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 5, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> Considering prices, amd is no different then intel/nvidia...if they have a good product, it will be pricey, about 5-10% more cores or lower price then intel/nvidia counterpart....and trust me, if amd was as big as them, you would all be paying a premium price for their stuff. I see no difference between any of them, and no reason to be a fan of any of them, although I have been less happy with amd products in the past then with intel/nvidia. When they started with unlocking cores, I thought, oh my god, these guys aren't selling cpu's, they're selling potatoes...get 2 for price of one...then the usual child diseases, like incompatibility, and I was like, k, i've seen enough. I'm not trying to slander anyone here, I'm just saying how it is, from my perspective at least. Simply lost confidence in them, but that may change in the future. Ryzen is a big no for me, however I would consider buying their gpu's, since a lot of ati folks still work there.


Honestly haven't seen a stranger post in years on reflection, "When they started with unlocking cores, I thought, oh my god, these guys aren't selling cpu's, they're selling potatoes...get 2 for price of one...then the usual child diseases, like incompatibility, and I was like, k, i've seen enough. I'm not trying to slander anyone here, I'm just saying how it is, from my perspective at least. "

What, where ,how.

I upgraded two months, ago and possibly just got downgraded to an r3 but I can't wait for Ces.


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 5, 2018)

well, competition is good, someone must reduce prices, that's why I'm happy about this...


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 5, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> well, competition is good, someone must reduce prices, that's why I'm happy about this...


That lineup puts six cores at 99£ ,new ,upto 4.3Ghz , which i can tell you will game or graft very well.
I can't wait ,shit my pc just got 10p'd didn't it.


----------



## Space Lynx (Dec 5, 2018)

that's funny. I was just talking about chiplet designs earlier


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 5, 2018)

Yeah no. This guy is more hype than anything. Hype, hype all aboard the hyper train.

if the Zen 2 is like speculation though the next gen TR platform would be even better for scientific computing. Don't know whether I will have money to switch to a TR though. Really been drooling over my friend's 2990WX.


----------



## ShurikN (Dec 5, 2018)

IF this turns out to be true, AMD literally killed the entirety of Intel's mainstream and HEDT, as well as entire Ryzen 1000/2000 lineup.



Gorstak said:


> Considering prices, amd is no different then intel/nvidia


Excuse me but WHAT!?!?
If these leaks are true, an 8 core part, with much higher clocks than previous generation, is $100 cheaper. Compared to the competition, for the same price you get 16 cores versus 8. For the same $330 as 2700X you get 50% more cores, around 15% base clock bump and 20% max boost increase.
AND all of that accompanied by noticeable and measurable IPC gains.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 5, 2018)

"In 2019 AMD will catapult gaming performance with 7nm GPUs" 

lol,this guy seems all facts no hype 

while Zen 2 will be a game changer,this video is all that xkm says. Calling this "analysis" is hilarious,though 8c ccx at 4.8GHz with vega 20 will be an instabuy for me. We'll see what happens.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Dec 5, 2018)

Upgrading to Ryzen 3700x for sure! 50% more cores and 16% higher boost. Hell yeah!
I'm already happy with my Ryzen 2700x gaming + streaming performance, but if I can dedicate 4 cores for encoding, gaming performance will already be so much better for me.


----------



## kastriot (Dec 5, 2018)

Here if you wanna good laugh(Read comments!) 

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-specs-prices-leaked-upto-16-cores-5-1ghz-on-am4/


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Get ready for the wave of : "hey it's that adored guy again, be real dude who are you kidding". Same guy who got the *Rome* leaks right before anyone else did.


You forgot about *Charlie*, that guy gets a lot of hate on other forums as well but he has his (insider) sources & is right more often than not. Also IIRC it was *CanardPC* that leaked it first, more than a year back.



Jelle Mees said:


> Upgrading to Ryzen 3700x for sure! *50% more cores* and 16% higher boost. Hell yeah!
> I'm already happy with my Ryzen 2700x gaming + streaming performance, but if I can dedicate 4 cores for encoding, gaming performance will already be so much better for me.


You mean 100% more (Ryzen 9) cores 10000% more fun


----------



## TheLostSwede (Dec 5, 2018)

Sorry, but this is most likely fake.
That said, there are some grains of truth in there.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

What parts are fake? Do keep in mind that final clocks can & are often adjusted upwards/downwards depending on the competition, market, binning, yields et al.


----------



## ShurikN (Dec 5, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> What parts are fake? Do keep in mind that final clocks can & are often adjusted upwards/downwards depending on the competition, market, binning, yields et al.


The only thing that is debatable are clock speeds, everything else is feasible.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

ShurikN said:


> The only thing that is debatable are clock speeds, everything else is feasible.


If all chips, AM4 or TR, are based on chiplets then 16c on mainstream is just a formality. The clocks, like you said, is the only thing that can change but that's less of an issue now with better IPC & node.


----------



## Frick (Dec 5, 2018)

Since I haven't seen the video, and won't see it, I'll just speculate wildly about its contents:

Threadripper will in 2019 get 128c/256t, all running 4 Ghz. Ryzen 3000 will top out at 16C/32T @ 5Ghz with a 40% IPC boost from Ryzen 2000. Godzilla will fight Cthulu tonight at 8 pm.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Frick said:


> Since I haven't seen the video, and won't see it, I'll just speculate wildly about its contents:
> 
> Threadripper will in 2019 get 128c/256t, all running 4 Ghz. Ryzen 3000 will top out at 16C/32T @ 5Ghz with a 40% IPC boost from Ryzen 2000. *Godzilla will fight Cthulu* tonight at 8 pm.


Will that be televised or streamed online?


----------



## Honest Abe (Dec 5, 2018)

I think the 7nm hype is because they can't hype the actual marginal improvement in performance over 14nm. I'm very wary of this because it is unlike marketing teams to hype a boring spec that is not apparent whatsoever when using a product.


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 5, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> What parts are fake? Do keep in mind that final clocks can & are often adjusted upwards/downwards depending on the competition, market, binning, yields et al.



So what part is really content then? Anyone could guess this was the direction it was going... Its like predicting the sun will shine at some point. Ever since Ryzen 1 this was what Ryzen 3 would probably be looking like. The only thing new is some shots at price points - but, note - subject to change because we all know MSRP means very little when demand is high.

Bottom line, this video tells us what we've wanted to hear and expected to hear. Very informative indeed /s


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> So what part is really content then? Anyone could guess this was the direction it was going... Its like predicting the sun will shine at some point. Ever since Ryzen 1 this was what Ryzen 3 would probably be looking like. The only thing new is some shots at price points - but, note - subject to change because we all know MSRP means very little when demand is high.
> 
> Bottom line, this video tells us what we've wanted to hear and expected to hear. Very informative indeed /s


He has a youtube channel & so he has to do something for that, apart from his sources or "alleged" sources giving some new info, there's nothing earth shattering in there. That's par for course since he's strictly not a reviewer, also the part about *Navi* dGPU seemed interesting to me.


----------



## londiste (Dec 5, 2018)

Honest Abe said:


> I think the 7nm hype is because they can't hype the actual marginal improvement in performance over 14nm. I'm very wary of this because it is unlike marketing teams to hype a boring spec that is not apparent whatsoever when using a product.


It is not the performance improvement that is important with 7nm. 50-70% smaller die and 50-60% lower power consumption at the same clocks compared to 14/12nm.



ShurikN said:


> IF this turns out to be true, AMD literally killed the entirety of Intel's mainstream and HEDT, as well as entire Ryzen 1000/2000 lineup.
> ...
> AND all of that accompanied by noticeable and measurable IPC gains.


This is still a chiplet design we are talking about. When it comes to desktop and especially gaming - which is a big part of mainstream - memory latency is very important. Based on what is known about Rome, RAM is at least a hop over IF away and is suspected to have about 100ns latency - for both AMD and Intel processors one hop away has latency of about 125nm but AMD said they got this to about 30% better in Rome. Current Ryzens have about 60-70ns and Intel's bunch has 40-60ns. I am really curious how AMD resolved that.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

londiste said:


> It is not the performance improvement that is important with 7nm. 50-70% smaller die and 50-60% lower power consumption at the same clocks compared to 14/12nm.
> 
> This is still a chiplet design we are talking about. When it comes to desktop and especially gaming - which is a big part of mainstream - memory latency is very important. Based on what is known about Rome, RAM is at least a hop over IF away and is suspected to have about 100ns latency - for both AMD and Intel processors one hop away has latency of about 125nm but AMD said they got this to about 30% better in Rome. Current Ryzens have about 60-70ns and Intel's bunch has 40-60ns. *I am really curious how AMD resolved that*.


Higher clocks (yeah that helps) & better mem speeds, also caches + (better) *IF*.


----------



## londiste (Dec 5, 2018)

That doubling of L3 Cache is definitely part of it. Cache management is a quiestion though. And whether there is a (large) cache on the IO die as well.
Memory speeds? We are still with DDR4 and Zen2 will use that, so no speed increase.
Clock increase is minor. Btw, what clock is memory controller running at, shouldn't that be synced with RAM speed?


----------



## JRMBelgium (Dec 5, 2018)

londiste said:


> That doubling of L3 Cache is definitely part of it. Cache management is a quiestion though. And whether there is a (large) cache on the IO die as well.
> Memory speeds? We are still with DDR4 and Zen2 will use that, so no speed increase.
> Clock increase is minor. Btw, what clock is memory controller running at, shouldn't that be synced with RAM speed?



It's normal that the clock increase is minor. They are just doin't what Intel has done in the last years. They have to make sure there is still room for growth on the same architecture. 
I wouldn't be suprised though if people manage to get 6Ghz on those 6-8 core CPU's.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Zen 1.5 i.e. Zen+ topped out around DDR4 3466~3600 & Zen 2 could get that working up to DDR4 4000 or higher, btw higher mem speeds also reduce latency, it isn't always about timing. Now if the mem speed is decoupled from IF, that could also enhance the possibility of higher clocks.


----------



## londiste (Dec 5, 2018)

Jelle Mees said:


> I wouldn't be suprised though if people manage to get 6Ghz on those 6-8 core CPU's.


I would. 7nm is still new and so far has not been shown to be stellar with clock speeds.
I mean someone will definitely get 6GHz out of these but that is probably under LN2 as usual 



R0H1T said:


> Zen 1.5 i.e. Zen+ topped out around DDR4 3466~3600 & Zen 2 could get that working up to DDR4 4000 or higher, btw higher mem speeds also reduce latency, it isn't always about timing. Now if the mem speed is decoupled from IF, that could also enhance the possibility of higher clocks.


4000 over 3600 is 11%. At a significant cost and so far the lower speed with lower timings seem to be a better deal.
With IF being decoupled from mem speed, faster memory will not benefit as much as it does on Ryzen 1000/2000.

Edit: now that I think of it, maybe it is the other way around. Decoupling allows running IF links at significantly faster clocks...


----------



## Tomgang (Dec 5, 2018)

Gonna admit. If these spec are spot on, intel gonna have hard fight on for them in 2019. Cause they are still on 14 nm the most of 2019 and only op to 8 cores so far. So with 16 cores and if the base and boost clocks are true, amd really seems to have a strong compettetor againts intel for 2019.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Dec 5, 2018)

Tomgang said:


> Gonna admit. If these spec are spot on, intel gonna have hard fight on for them in 2019. Cause they are still on 14 nm the most of 2019 and only op to 8 cores so far. So with 16 cores and if the base and boost clocks are true, amd really seems to have a strong compettetor againts intel for 2019.



You're clearly not keeping up with the news, Intel has 10nm products in the market now. https://www.anandtech.com/show/13669/10nm-cannon-lake-nuc-at-major-retailers
If it's competitive is a different matter...


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

Tomgang said:


> Gonna admit. If these spec are spot on, intel gonna have hard fight on for them in 2019. Cause they are still on 14 nm the most of 2019 and only op to 8 cores so far. So with 16 cores and if the base and boost clocks are true, amd really seems to have a strong compettetor againts intel for 2019.


Well, it's not like current Ryzen is a weak competitor


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

They're selling the (10nm) defective dies, probably have lots to get rid of. Notice the lack of working IGP in there?


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> They're selling the (10nm) defective dies, probably have lots to get rid of. Notice the lack of working IGP in there?


It's kind of ironic. When building a desktop, I know I won't be using the IGP, so I'd rather not pay for one. But until Ryzen, there was no such option, unless going (very) high-end. When buying a laptop, I know I don't need more than the IGP offers, but good luck finding something reasonably specced that doesn't also shove a dGPU down your throat 

But we're drifting.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Dec 5, 2018)

AdoredTV


----------



## ShurikN (Dec 5, 2018)

Enterprise24 said:


> AdoredTV
> 
> View attachment 111913


Yup, the same guy who leaked RTX naming while the rest of tech press were too busy debating whether it will be GTX 2000 or GTX 1100.


----------



## oxidized (Dec 5, 2018)

ShurikN said:


> Yup, the same guy who leaked RTX naming while the rest of tech press were too busy debating whether it will be GTX 2000 or GTX 1100.



Oh and so now he is some sort of an oracle right? Rofl


----------



## Enterprise24 (Dec 5, 2018)

ShurikN said:


> Yup, the same guy who leaked RTX naming while the rest of tech press were too busy debating whether it will be GTX 2000 or GTX 1100.


There is no 2070 7GB , 2060 5GB or Titan RTX for $3K and I doubt it will be 50% faster than 1080 Ti considering that 2080 Ti is just ~30% faster.


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

ShurikN said:


> Yup, the same guy who leaked RTX naming while the rest of tech press were too busy debating whether it will be GTX 2000 or GTX 1100.


I would concentrate more on the leaked product than the leaker.
Knowing what we know about current Zen, 16 cores is almost a given somewhere in the product stack - it's not like there won't be SKUs from low to high end.
5GHz is already done on 14nm (Intel, single core boost). 7nm should allow more cores to boost that high. However, clocks are among the last things to be set in stone, so as well connected as the leaker may be, the number is just an estimate at this point.
Navi, I'm having my doubts about. There's no telling when desktop Navi arrives and I don't ever recall a GPU architecture hitting IGPs at the same time it hit the desktop. But who knows, there's a first time for everything.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 5, 2018)

The only concerning thing about those APUs is lack of memory bandwidth. The ~40gb/s that an average dual-channel DDR4 kit offers is just not enough.


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> The only concerning thing about those APUs is lack of memory bandwidth. The ~40gb/s that an average dual-channel DDR4 kit offers is just not enough.


IGPs will not be a substitute for a mid-range dGPU any time soon. I've come to accept that.


----------



## kapone32 (Dec 5, 2018)

I do believe that the video is true and that AMD will be able to do this. The difference between the R7 1700 and the R7 2700 with just a 2nm drop in lithography means that going from 14 to 7 should yield the kind of results that are speculated in the video. As far as I am concerned this will mean that AMD Cpus will not only close the gap against their Intel variants but pricing will ensure that the I7 and I9 will be the only CPUs new builders will be using because a 6 core/12 thread CPU for $99 is academic vs an I5 (any I5). I myself will probably get the 3800X for some nice gaming loving. I was also enthused about the GPU(s) and pricing a card 15% faster than the Vega 64 for $249 is super cool. Way to go AMD to bring performance back to the masses. I might even go to CES to see for myself


----------



## Wavetrex (Dec 5, 2018)

kapone32 said:


> The difference between the R7 1700 and the R7 2700 with just a 2nm drop in lithography


Not even so. There is no drop in litography, 12nm is just a name for an improved 14nm. Basically, 12nm = Intel's 14nm++. It's not smaller, just a bit more efficient, allowing higher clocks on the 2000 generation.

7nm however IS a significant shrink (not half as one might think, more around 60% smaller). It is pretty much equivalent in size with Intel's 10nm... except that it works (while Intel's doesn't, exactly because of what AMD said in their Rome presentation - I/O Doesn't scale. Intel attempted to scale I/O as well at 10nm and they failed miserably at it)

The two-process approach that AMD does is amazing, having core+cache chip at 7nm (a sort of 10nm in Intel terms) and I/O at 14nm allow getting the best of both worlds.

~~~

I have a feeling the 12-core chips will be the sweet spot of this new generation, they will sell like hotcakes.


----------



## Joss (Dec 5, 2018)

Wavetrex said:


> I have a feeling the 12-core chips will be the sweet spot of this new generation



I can't believe we're talking 6 core entry level and 12 core mid range 
It's not even 2 years, more like 22 months, since Zen launched. Remember early 2017? That's right, that's when a 4 core was mid range and the same with HT enabled was high end...


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Dec 5, 2018)

Indeed over a decade stuck at quad cores for desktops, now in less than 2 years you can buy an over the counter desktop CPU up to 32 cores with Threadripper.

Competition can do wonders, when there is some.


----------



## ppn (Dec 5, 2018)

5nm brings another doubling of the core count.


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

yakk said:


> Indeed over a decade stuck at quad cores for desktops, now in less than 2 years you can buy an over the counter desktop CPU up to 32 cores with Threadripper.
> 
> Competition can do wonders, when there is some.


Imho core count is the new MHz. Still, I can't complain too much if $200-250 buys me a few more cores these days.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Joss said:


> I can't believe we're talking 6 core entry level and 12 core mid range
> It's not even 2 years, more like 22 months, since Zen launched. Remember early 2017? That's right, that's when a 4 core was mid range and the same with HT enabled was high end...


I seriously doubt the 6 core will be entry level, this can't be the entire lineup. There ought to be a quad core in there somewhere, even if with an IGP.


----------



## unikin (Dec 5, 2018)

8C/16T 4.5 GHz with 10 % better IPC is all I need from AMD CPU for the next 5 years. If AMD can deliver, I'll jump the wagon ASAP. Games will only start to implement 8 threads with next gen consoles (the only games that I can think of that utilize 8 threads now are Far cry 5 and Aches of singularity). Given that todays PC gaming is mostly compounded out of poorly optimized console ports in AAA titles segment and poorly coded Indi games, 8 threads will be enough for at least 5 years. As for usual productivity work (not counting in encoding, rendering, computing), 3-6 threads are more than enough for fluent work.


----------



## ShurikN (Dec 5, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> There ought to be a quad core in there somewhere, even if with an IGP.


Maybe not a Ryzen, but an Athlon part.


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

unikin said:


> 8C/16T 4.5 GHz with 10 % better IPC is all I need from AMD CPU for the next 5 years. If AMD can deliver, I'll jump the wagon ASAP. Games will only start to implement 8 threads with next gen consoles (the only games that I can think of that utilize 8 threads now are Far cry 5 and Aches of singularity). Given that todays PC gaming is mostly compounded out of poorly optimized console ports in AAA titles segment and poorly coded Indi games, 8 threads will be enough for at least 5 years. As for usual productivity work (not counting in encoding, rendering, computing), 3-6 threads is more than enough for fluent work.


I agree to what you said, except for one thing. Indie games don't multithread well, not necessarily because they're poorly coded, but because they tend to use the cheaper engines that don't support mutithreading past a certain point. That and many of the indie gems are really not about graphics


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 5, 2018)

What I find hard to believe is that AMD will use a fully functional,highly binned 8 core ccx for a $200 ryzen 5 part. They'll most likely save those for $500 16c Ryzens while Ryzen 5 will get 2x 4 core ccx's. If they can,however,put a fully functional 8 core ccx running 4.8GHz out of the box along with a 1280sp GPU,all with 16 pci-e 4.0 lanes, and still price it at $250 I'll even buy it out of respect for AMD


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> What I find hard to believe is that AMD will use a fully functional,highly binned 8 core ccx for a $200 ryzen 5 part. They'll most likely save those for $500 16c Ryzens while Ryzen 5 will get 2x 4 core ccx's. If they can,however,put a fully functional 8 core ccx running 4.8GHz out of the box along with a 1280sp GPU,all with 16 pci-e 4.0 lanes, and still price it at $250 I'll even buy it out of respect for AMD


You're reading too much into it. It's just a leak.


----------



## king of swag187 (Dec 5, 2018)

What's really grinding my gears is that these are being treated as actual evidence/leaks when it's just one silly YT channel making a video


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 5, 2018)

king of swag187 said:


> What's really grinding my gears is that these are being treated as actual evidence/leaks when it's just one silly YT channel making a video


nah it's all 100% legitimate


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

king of swag187 said:


> What's really grinding my gears is that these are being treated as actual evidence/leaks when it's just one silly YT channel making a video


You're new, that's all. Taking good news about AMD with a grain of salt is frowned upon here and will get you labeled as an Intel or Nvidia shill. Just look how I got grilled in the other thread just for saying mindfactory is not a good source to gauge how well Ryzen is selling.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 5, 2018)

2950x is 16c/32t and sells at $900, they're gonna make a 16c/32t at $450 now. Most generous of them.


----------



## HTC (Dec 5, 2018)

bug said:


> You're new, that's all. Taking good news about AMD with a grain of salt is frowned upon here and will get you labeled as an Intel or Nvidia shill. Just look how I got grilled in the other thread just for saying mindfactory is not a good source to gauge how well Ryzen is selling.



We have a bug here not grilled enough: needs more grill time ...

Joking ...

As for the topic, while i can totally see it happen like this (the SKUs), both pricing as well as clocks are a bit too optimistic, IMO.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Dec 5, 2018)

I'll wait for this to be verified before I get excited, if this is actually true I might sell my platform and go with AMD


----------



## unikin (Dec 5, 2018)

Don't be surprised if we get "only"  6C (maybe with 12T) on Ryzen 3, 8C/16T with Ryzen 5 and 10C/20T with Ryzen 7 plus 300-500 MHz frequency and 10 % IPC boost. This sounds more realistic to me, given that Intel is already preparing 10 core answer. It would still be killer CPU, especially Ryzen 5. Getting i7 8700K performance for $240, what more can a man want? 8C/16T high frequency CPU is more than 99,9 % retail consumers need and will need in 5 years time frame, until PS6 console comes out and even then it will probably be still OK as I don't see SP6/XBOX moving beyond 16 threats anytime soon.


----------



## Splinterdog (Dec 5, 2018)

In the same 'leak':
"AMD’s next generation Navi family will initially be comprised of three members, which the company is planning to announced at CES next month. These include the *Radeon RX 3080, RX 3070 and RX 3060*."
Aren't those alleged naming conventions a little too similar to Nvidia's? I mean, would AMD intentionally wish to really do that? 
I would say, no, personally.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 5, 2018)

Splinterdog said:


> In the same 'leak':
> "AMD’s next generation Navi family will initially be comprised of three members, which the company is planning to announced at CES next month. These include the *Radeon RX 3080, RX 3070 and RX 3060*."
> Aren't those alleged naming conventions a little too similar to Nvidia's? I mean, would AMD intentionally wish to really do that?
> I would say, no, personally.



they've done it with chipsets successfully, so why not. lol  I would go with the 3800 3700 and 3600 like their chips though...  That way you can have a 3600x and a RX 3800 GPU.


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

Splinterdog said:


> In the same 'leak':
> "AMD’s next generation Navi family will initially be comprised of three members, which the company is planning to announced at CES next month. These include the *Radeon RX 3080, RX 3070 and RX 3060*."
> Aren't those alleged naming conventions a little too similar to Nvidia's? I mean, would AMD intentionally wish to really do that?
> I would say, no, personally.


They named their chipsets like Intel's, only increasing the first digit. While it's confusing for the average Joe, it makes my task of comparing them slightly easier.


----------



## Joss (Dec 5, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> What I find hard to believe is that AMD will use a fully functional,highly binned 8 core ccx for a $200 ryzen 5 part. *They'll most likely save those for $500 16c Ryzens while Ryzen 5 will get 2x 4 core ccx's*


The most interesting thing (if the video is accurate) is that the CCXs are replaced by chiplets and these come in 3 flavours: 4,6 and 8 cores.


----------



## r9 (Dec 5, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> Considering prices, amd is no different then intel/nvidia...if they have a good product, it will be pricey, about 5-10% more cores or lower price then intel/nvidia counterpart....and trust me, if amd was as big as them, you would all be paying a premium price for their stuff. I see no difference between any of them, and no reason to be a fan of any of them, although I have been less happy with amd products in the past then with intel/nvidia. When they started with unlocking cores, I thought, oh my god, these guys aren't selling cpu's, they're selling potatoes...get 2 for price of one...then the usual child diseases, like incompatibility, and I was like, k, i've seen enough. I'm not trying to slander anyone here, I'm just saying how it is, from my perspective at least. Simply lost confidence in them, but that may change in the future. Ryzen is a big no for me, however I would consider buying their gpu's, since a lot of ati folks still work there.



+1 Exactly.
That's why I wouldn't want NVDIA and Intel go down.
Competition is what not just enables lower prices but also drive the technology forward.
If it wasn't for AMD we would be still using single core P4 CPU maybe dual cores by 2020.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Dec 5, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> 2950x is 16c/32t and sells at $900, they're gonna make a 16c/32t at $450 now. Most generous of them.



Not generous at all...  that's potentially what AMD has determined they need to do to expand their market.   If they didn't judge they needed to, they surely wouldn't.  In this case pressing their advantage while their competition stumbled,  badly, makes good business sense.  That's how competition works.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 5, 2018)

yakk said:


> Not generous at all...  that's potentially what AMD has determined they need to do to expand their market.   If they didn't judge they needed to, they surely wouldn't.  In this case pressing their advantage while their competition stumbled,  badly, makes good business sense.  That's how competition works.




I feel like buying their top end series is a constant upgrade trap... If my main system was R7 i would have gotten the r7 1700 @$350, then sold that for $150ish and then gotten the 2700x for $400 then sold that for $250 or so... then buying the $350-$500 zen 2 chip... so ultimately you end up spending close to the $700 - $1000 that i could have gotten the 7900x for and just called it a day.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 5, 2018)

let me just leave this here


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Joss said:


> The most interesting thing (if the video is accurate) is that the CCXs are replaced by chiplets and these come in 3 flavours: 4,6 and 8 cores.


CCX is the building block of Zen, they aren't replaced by anything.
We also don't know (yet) if the "chiplets" are 2 CCX with 4 cores each or just the one with 8 core per CCX. The CCX is like your basic atom structure, molecule for chiplets.


----------



## Hockster (Dec 5, 2018)

Splinterdog said:


> In the same 'leak':
> "AMD’s next generation Navi family will initially be comprised of three members, which the company is planning to announced at CES next month. These include the *Radeon RX 3080, RX 3070 and RX 3060*."
> Aren't those alleged naming conventions a little too similar to Nvidia's? I mean, would AMD intentionally wish to really do that?
> I would say, no, personally.



i3, i5, i7, i9.....Ryzen 3, 5, 7, 9


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

i9 was coming, I said it way back before Zen was released, therefore it stands to reason that Ryzen 9 is also incoming.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 5, 2018)

unikin said:


> Don't be surprised if we get "only"  6C (maybe with 12T) on Ryzen 3, 8C/16T with Ryzen 5 and 10C/20T with Ryzen 7 plus 300-500 MHz frequency and 10 % IPC boost. This sounds more realistic to me, given that Intel is already preparing 10 core answer. It would still be killer CPU, especially Ryzen 5. Getting i7 8700K performance for $240, what more can a man want? 8C/16T high frequency CPU is more than 99,9 % retail consumers need and will need in 5 years time frame, until PS6 console comes out and even then it will probably be still OK as I don't see SP6/XBOX moving beyond 16 threats anytime soon.


Maybe but why.
Your ideals fit being nice to intel so they stay competitive in cores, on what planet would that make sense to intels competition, they want to sell Moar not the same, upto the r9 makes sense ,the r9 does sound barmy but with only dusl memory channels there is some segregation still.
I think at least the lower teirs of that chart is spot on.
As for 3080 it's one thousand above a 2080 absolutely true name ,gotta be true


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Now they just need to add an X here another couple of Xs there ~ 3080XxX & they'll have a *better* name, only just though


----------



## HTC (Dec 5, 2018)

Joss said:


> The most interesting thing (if the video is accurate) is that *the CCXs are replaced by chiplets and these come in 3 flavours: 4,6 and 8 cores.*



No, dude: what we'll have is fully functioning 8c chiplets, two dies disabled 6c chiplets and four dies disabled 4c chiplets. In each of the disabled chiplets there is @ least one core either killed off via a defect in fabrication, a badly functioning core (too slow VS the rest?) or a purposely disabled core, in order for the "correct core number" to be present on the chiplet, meaning it's entirely possible a four core chiplet had actually *five* good working cores but one got disabled, for example.

Also the chiplet *IS* the CCX: it's just that some of it's components were moved to the IO die instead of being on the CCX, like with Zen and Zen+.

EDIT

Example: say when binning AMD "found" a chiplet with 6 cores that could do 4.8 GHz but 2 cores could only do 4.1 GHz: they could either sell this chiplet as 4.1 GHz or disable 2 cores and sell it as a 4.8 GHz 6 core chiplet.


----------



## bug (Dec 5, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> Now they just need to add an X here another couple of Xs there ~ 3080XxX & they'll have a *better* name, only just though


Radeon X1950 XTX would like to have a word with you.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 5, 2018)

Just getting along with the (changing) times, XTX is so ATI ~ no offense to the ATI fans


----------



## kapone32 (Dec 5, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> I feel like buying their top end series is a constant upgrade trap... If my main system was R7 i would have gotten the r7 1700 @$350, then sold that for $150ish and then gotten the 2700x for $400 then sold that for $250 or so... then buying the $350-$500 zen 2 chip... so ultimately you end up spending close to the $700 - $1000 that i could have gotten the 7900x for and just called it a day.



For me, as an AMD fan i have no problem doing exactly what you said. getting a year out of a CPU is good versus the days of Windows XP. Especially since AMD had been floundering financially in recent years. The more money they can get the better products they can release, if this is true, and i am gathering friends to go to CES I will have zero issue selling my R5 2600 for $100 and using the rest of that to buy indeed....my biggest issue is which CPU to buy from the product stack.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Dec 5, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> I feel like buying their top end series is a constant upgrade trap... If my main system was R7 i would have gotten the r7 1700 @$350, then sold that for $150ish and then gotten the 2700x for $400 then sold that for $250 or so... then buying the $350-$500 zen 2 chip... so ultimately you end up spending close to the $700 - $1000 that i could have gotten the 7900x for and just called it a day.



This reminds me of the golden years of the GPUs.  Didn't think I'd see one again for CPUs with big leaps in gains like this.  When times like these happen residual value on parts tank pretty quick.

Think you maybe need to identify what you want to use your rig for.  I bought a 2700x and it does what I need it to do.  I do not plan on upgrading it for a few years at least.  ROI is planned for.  Would I like to have double the CPU?  Of course, but at the time of purchase that is what I needed.  If AMD does come through with (most) of these CPUs, then it's an insta-buy indulgence from me and my 2700x is going as my new FreeNAS server with nice VM potential!

VMs and all these cores is NICE!


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 5, 2018)

yakk said:


> This reminds me of the golden years of the GPUs.  Didn't think I'd see one again for CPUs with big leaps in gains like this.  When times like these happen residual value on parts tank pretty quick.
> 
> Think you maybe need to identify what you want to use your rig for.  I bought a 2700x and it does what I need it to do.  I do not plan on upgrading it for a few years at least.  ROI is planned for.  Would I like to have double the CPU?  Of course, but at the time of purchase that is what I needed.  If AMD does come through with (most) of these CPUs, then it's an insta-buy indulgence from me and my 2700x is going as my new FreeNAS server with nice VM potential!
> 
> VMs and all these cores is NICE!


Same here with crunching as my ever happy excuse.
We just need chiplet Gpus that work in such multiples as well and we could all see something of an evolution ,8k144fps is my personal present target, ultra settings.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 6, 2018)

He's another piece of thoroughly written journalistic brilliance from a channel called ufdtech. This one wins in the category of how much hype can be fit into a thumbnail


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 6, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> He has a youtube channel & so he has to do something for that, apart from his sources or "alleged" sources giving some new info, there's nothing earth shattering in there. That's par for course since he's strictly not a reviewer, also the part about Navi dGPU seemed interesting to me.



Right so bottom line, there are no real leaks here, he clickbaited you and everyone else here with things we actually already knew.


TheLostSwede said:


> You're clearly not keeping up with the news, Intel has 10nm products in the market now. https://www.anandtech.com/show/13669/10nm-cannon-lake-nuc-at-major-retailers
> If it's competitive is a different matter...



Well wooptiedoo, they have a low power dualcore at horrible clocks on 10nm  2010 called and wants its specs back.


----------



## Splinterdog (Dec 6, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> He's another piece of thoroughly written journalistic brilliance from a channel called ufdtech. This one wins in the category of how much hype can be fit into a thumbnail
> 
> View attachment 112017


That was just irritating and unwatchable, even for three minutes, after he'd plugged Ting something or other for several minutes.
I often wish so many YouTube presenters would slow down and not ram their regurgitated nonsense down our throats in this manner. I know they want the views, but jumping on the band wagon of rumours is so transparent.


----------



## Pumper (Dec 6, 2018)

RTX 2070 performance with GTX 1070 TDP and the price of GTX 1060?

Yeah right.


----------



## ShurikN (Dec 6, 2018)

Pumper said:


> RTX 2070 performance with GTX 1070 TDP and the price of GTX 1060?
> 
> Yeah right.


HD 3000/4000 series say hi.


----------



## bug (Dec 6, 2018)

Pumper said:


> RTX 2070 performance with GTX 1070 TDP and the price of GTX 1060?
> 
> Yeah right.


It will attract a lot of clicks though


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

Pumper said:


> RTX 2070 performance with GTX 1070 TDP and the price of GTX 1060?



7nm also says hi.

Whether that's what Navi 20 will be is a different matter but that's perfectly reasonable for a new GPU in the near future. 1080 had similar TDP to the 970 didn't it ? And it was twice as fast. It certainly wasn't as cheap as a 960 but that's Nvidia for you right there.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 6, 2018)

bug said:


> It will attract a lot of clicks though



Which is the whole point of those Tubers--clickbaits and subscriptions. I mean sure some of them does succeed in doing so but that market has already saturated. Also people can easily tell if they are putting in actual effort or just hopping along the bandwagon.



Vya Domus said:


> 7nm also says hi.
> 
> Whether that's what Navi 20 will be is a different matter but that's perfectly reasonable for a new GPU in the near future. 1080 had similar TDP to the 970 didn't it ? And it was twice as fast. It certainly wasn't as cheap as a 960 but that's Nvidia for you right there.



7nm is not a magic-snake-oil that solves all of your problem. If you put fail-dozer on 7nm it would still be a turd. Without revolutionzing GPU design 7nm benefits would not be that great. Just take a look at the old R9 390/X to RX 480/X. 28nm to 14nm and you would expect way better improvement. The truth was the opposite. 

GCN must die. RTG already has GCN on the chopping block. It is just a manner of when now.


----------



## 8bitgamer757 (Dec 6, 2018)

My cpu probly just lost 50% of its value


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 6, 2018)

ShurikN said:


> The only thing that is debatable are clock speeds, everything else is feasible.



That makes all of it debatable, by definition.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> 7nm is not a magic-snake-oil that solves all of your problem.



Apparently for Nvidia TSMC's 16nm did just that and 28nm before that. The density increase alone gets you close to having the same performance at half the TDP, it's a hard number not magic. Be mindful consoles are just around the corner, you can bet MS and Sony wouldn't touch anything that doesn't fit that description.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 6, 2018)

Splinterdog said:


> I mean, would AMD intentionally wish to really do that?



*Looks at chipset names*

Yep.


----------



## bug (Dec 6, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Which is the whole point of those Tubers--clickbaits and subscriptions. I mean sure some of them does succeed in doing so but that market has already saturated. Also people can easily tell if they are putting in actual effort or just hopping along the bandwagon.



Even the horoscope is right from time to time. Two thousand years later, it still works


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 6, 2018)

bug said:


> Even the horoscope is right from time to time. Two thousand years later, it still works


Except adoredtv has not been right Just once, took actual time to research, asked the right questions and then concluded, some of yall watched 30 seconds or less then concluded you knew better.
His analysis matches mine a couple of years ago so i see it as likely right sunce i like all you am always right jk.


----------



## Vario (Dec 6, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> I feel like buying their top end series is a constant upgrade trap... If my main system was R7 i would have gotten the r7 1700 @$350, then sold that for $150ish and then gotten the 2700x for $400 then sold that for $250 or so... then buying the $350-$500 zen 2 chip... so ultimately you end up spending close to the $700 - $1000 that i could have gotten the 7900x for and just called it a day.


Thats the absurdity of the longer term socket support argument revealed.  In reality, CPU should be upgraded no sooner than once every 4-5 years IMO.  By that time, you are ready for a new motherboard anyway.

Edit:  Glad for youtube CC, I can't understand a word this guy says.  Also 2x speed.  I'd rather read than listen to this guys rambling accent.


----------



## Hellfire (Dec 6, 2018)

I have to agree with theoneandonlymrk here, The conclusions given by Adoredtv were very reasonable and possible. obviously it has to be taken with a pinch of salt but I believe we'll be seeing something very close to what was leaked.

If anything will change it'll be pricing.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

Vario said:


> Thats the absurdity of the longer term socket support argument revealed.



Yet we also have Intel releasing a gazillion sockets in less than 2 years that aren't all backward compatible or anything. Clearly there is a spectrum and the absurdity can go both ways.


----------



## Pumper (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> 7nm also says hi.
> 
> Whether that's what Navi 20 will be is a different matter but that's perfectly reasonable for a new GPU in the near future. 1080 had similar TDP to the 970 didn't it ? And it was twice as fast. It certainly wasn't as cheap as a 960 but that's Nvidia for you right there.



Yeah, and yet both RTX 2070 and RX 590 are 12nm, but the 590 is only competing with 1060 while running the same TDP as 2070. So nm are irrelevant when comparing AMD to nvidia.


----------



## londiste (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Yet we also have Intel releasing a gazillion sockets in less than 2 years that aren't all backward compatible or anything. Clearly there is a spectrum and the absurdity can go both ways.


I know you are exaggerating to make a point but Intel is releasing about one socket in 2 years.
2009 - 1156
2011 - 1155
2013 - 1150
2015 - 1151
2017 - 1151v2


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

Pumper said:


> Yeah, and yet both RTX 2070 and RX 590 are 12nm



Different nodes, actually. TSMC vs GloFo and Samsung apparently. The number of nm means nothing these days really.


----------



## Vario (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> I know you are exaggerating to make a point but Intel is releasing about one socket in 2 years.
> 2009 - 1156
> 2011 - 1155
> 2013 - 1150
> ...



I think some of the irritation is the different chipsets for each lake platforms, but really doesn't matter because there is little reason to upgrade CPU that frequently.  Ironically some of the best clocks for the 8th gen were on jury rigged Z170 Formula OC.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> I know you are exaggerating



You are right I also meant to say chipsets because that's another way they make platforms obsolete. There is still no contest on how absurd it is however.

And it's not like AMD will stick to AM4 forever, I reckon Ryzen 3 will be the last generation to be backwards compatible. 3 generations (more like 2) is a perfect middle ground.


----------



## bug (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Yet we also have Intel releasing a gazillion sockets in less than 2 years that aren't all backward compatible or anything. Clearly there is a spectrum and the absurdity can go both ways.


I don't think this is absurd. Just tricky.
With Intel you get to keep everything for longer (but the performance is going nowhere), with AMD you get goodies faster, but every upgrade costs you more $$$.
As for sockets, even if AMD provides backwards compatibility, they also release new CPUs alongside new chipsets. So you can reuse your motherboard, but you're still missing out on some features. Given a choice, I'd opt for AMD's approach. But since it's not flawless, you'll get some heat whatever you do.


----------



## londiste (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> You are right I also meant to say chipsets because that's another way they make platforms obsolete. There is still no contest on how absurd it is however.


During the same time Intel has released pretty much one new chipset family per year. On the same socket older chipset boards do get compatibility for newer CPUs with BIOS updates.
That... actually matches quite exactly what AMD is doing. 300-series chipsets in 2017, 400-series chipsets in 2018, 500-series chipsets are coming in 2019.

It is not about right or wrong, the approaches are just different.

Edit:


Vya Domus said:


> And it's not like AMD will stick to AM4 forever, I reckon Ryzen 3 will be the last generation to be backwards compatible. 3 generations (more like 2) is a perfect middle ground.


Wait, are you saying you like Intel's approach on this better?


----------



## Vario (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> During the same time Intel has released pretty much one new chipset family per year. On the same socket older chipset boards do get compatibility for newer CPUs with BIOS updates.
> That... actually matches quite exactly what AMD is doing. 300-series chipsets in 2017, 400-series chipsets in 2018, 500-series chipsets are coming in 2019.


Not true, Z170, Z270, Z370 period they were physically locking out newer chips, which was bypassible  https://community.hwbot.org/topic/175489-asrock-z170-mocf-lives-on-coffee-lake-mods/

Don't want to derail thread on this.



Vya Domus said:


> You are right I also meant to say chipsets because that's another way they make platforms obsolete. There is still no contest on how absurd it is however.
> 
> And it's not like AMD will stick to AM4 forever, I reckon Ryzen 3 will be the last generation to be backwards compatible. 3 generations (more like 2) is a perfect middle ground.


Sooner or later it will be DDR5 and then new mobo anyway.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> During the same time Intel has released pretty much one new chipset family per year.



The point is not all CPUs released are compatible with those. That's all that matters, hardly anyone chooses the socket/chipset first and the CPU afterwards. The chipset is irrelevant for most, they want the performance first and the chipset choice is incidental. That said the socket/chipset has been a much more limiting factor on the Intel side than on the AMD one.


----------



## londiste (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> The point is not all CPUs released are compatible with those. That's all that matters, hardly anyone chooses the socket/chipset first and the CPU afterwards. The chipset is irrelevant for most, they want the performance first and the chipset choice is incidental. That said the socket/chipset has been a much more limiting factor on the Intel side than on the AMD one.


I do not get what you mean. All the CPUs released with the same socket regardless of chipset are compatible.
Why are Intel's sockets and chipsets more limiting?

By the way, there are functional differences with how Ryzen CPUs work on 300 and 400 boards. The leaks on Ryzen 3000 series are also saying Ryzen 9 will not work on old motherboards. Hoping these parts are not true though, I would love to have the 3800X on my B350 board 



Vario said:


> Not true, Z170, Z270, Z370 period they were physically locking out newer chips, which was bypassible  https://community.hwbot.org/topic/175489-asrock-z170-mocf-lives-on-coffee-lake-mods/
> Don't want to derail thread on this.


Remember all the talk about power consumption of Intel's 8000 and 9000 series CPUs? That actually backs up Intel on what they said was the reason for 1151v2.
High-end and OC motherboards may be fine with all this but Intel has to cover their ass with all the cheapo boards as well.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> All the CPUs released with the same socket regardless of chipset are compatible.



No they aren't. Simple as that.



londiste said:


> I do not get what you mean.



Then I am sorry, not going to go over this a million times.


----------



## londiste (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> No they aren't. Simple as that.


Some examples maybe?


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> Some examples maybe?



Coffe lake, Kaby lake and Skylake. All using the same LGA 1151 but not all compatible with all the boards that have that socket.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 6, 2018)

I have confidence in AMD delievering on Zen2 due to their good track record since Zen launches. Not so much for RTG, also due to their recent products being lackluster


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 6, 2018)

Id like to see a return of manual OC, so all cores run at 4.3+


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 6, 2018)

Ryzen 4 will still be AM4. With any AM4 chipset as long as the manufacturer gives you an updated BIOS.
Meanwhile, on the blue side of the fence, I can't put a Pentium G4560 on a H310 motherboard because "improved VRM".



eidairaman1 said:


> Id like to see a return of manual OC, so all cores run at 4.3+


P-State overclock?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> I do not get what you mean. All the CPUs released with the same socket regardless of chipset are compatible.
> Why are Intel's sockets and chipsets more limiting?
> 
> By the way, there are functional differences with how Ryzen CPUs work on 300 and 400 boards. The leaks on Ryzen 3000 series are also saying Ryzen 9 will not work on old motherboards. Hoping these parts are not true though, I would love to have the 3800X on my B350 board
> ...



Intel forces you to upgrade board and cpu.



GoldenX said:


> Ryzen 4 will still be AM4. With any AM4 chipset as long as the manufacturer gives you an updated BIOS.
> Meanwhile, on the blue side of the fence, I can't put a Pentium G4560 on a H310 motherboard because "improved VRM".
> 
> 
> P-State overclock?



No set it and forget it, no clock ramping or 1 core ramping up vs rest. Clock/bus conservation only counts on batteries. Just the Multiplier and fsb (w/e they call it now) and vcore (w/e its called now)


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> No set it and forget it, no clock ramping or 1 core ramping up vs rest.



You can still do that, I have a static 4Ghz overclock on my 1700X. As soon as you change the voltage or multiplier all that turbo core stuff shuts down.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 6, 2018)

Same here, a 3900MHz 1.35v profile and a 4000MHz 1,45v profile with Ryzen Master, when needed.
The thing is, if you have an X one, most of the time you don't need good ol' OC.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> You can still do that, I have a static 4Ghz overclock on my 1700X. As soon as you change the voltage or multiplier all that turbo core stuff shuts down.



Yeah i would always turn off pstates, that is only reason why my cpu stays stable, no dips in voltage


----------



## the54thvoid (Dec 6, 2018)

Vario said:


> Edit:  Glad for youtube CC, I can't understand a word this guy says.  Also 2x speed.  I'd rather read than listen to this guys rambling accent.



It's some weirdo Scottish hybrid thing. As one myself (a weirdo), I'd imagine you'd have a problem understanding me. 

Though, I......s-p-e-a-k......s-l-o-w-l-y......f-o-r......f-o-r-e-i-g-n-e-r-s..... (including my wifes family, who are English.)


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 6, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Right so bottom line, there are no real leaks here, he clickbaited you and everyone else here with things we actually already knew.
> 
> 
> Well wooptiedoo, they have a low power dualcore at horrible clocks on 10nm  2010 called and wants its specs back.


No what I'm saying is that when someone says they have their "sources" ~ we should look at their intent, & content, then make an "informed" decision based on the said leaker's past, whether such info is believable or not. Remember *SA* & all the howling cries about fake (*10nm*) news recently? Well here you go ~ Intel: EUV-Enabled 7nm Process Tech is on Track

Take it for whatever side of the coin one wants to see, I see this as Intel shelving their (original)10nm HVM for good.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 6, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> Take it for whatever side of the coin one wants to see, I see this as Intel shelving their (original)10nm HVM for good.



10nm was a massive screw up. They seem to have done the smart thing and mitigate their loses.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> 10nm was a massive screw up. They seem to have done the smart thing and mitigate their loses.


Yeah but 7nm is still at least a couple of years away & it'll need a near perfect execution otherwise Intel's manufacturing woes aren't going away anywhere.
Remember 22nm was late, 14nm as well & when 10nm goes AWOL one won't bet on Intel making the transition to 7nm smoothly, just yet.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> I do not get what you mean. All the CPUs released with the same socket regardless of chipset are compatible.
> Why are Intel's sockets and chipsets more limiting?
> 
> By the way, there are functional differences with how Ryzen CPUs work on 300 and 400 boards. The leaks on Ryzen 3000 series are also saying Ryzen 9 will not work on old motherboards. Hoping these parts are not true though, I would love to have the 3800X on my B350 board
> ...


Your just plain wrong i have a b250 board and dual core kabylake g cekeron , i Was going to upgrade it with another 8 core socket 1151 but can't fit 7 series up?



GoldenX said:


> Same here, a 3900MHz 1.35v profile and a 4000MHz 1,45v profile with Ryzen Master, when needed.
> The thing is, if you have an X one, most of the time you don't need good ol' OC.


You need extreme cooling and a hell of a lot of patience to beat PBO on all core loaded clocks or single core, PBO wrings as much as possible as it is.


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 6, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> *Looks at chipset names*
> 
> Yep.



lmao...like the same dude is doing the naming for both amd and intel


----------



## TheLostSwede (Dec 6, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Right so bottom line, there are no real leaks here, he clickbaited you and everyone else here with things we actually already knew.
> 
> 
> Well wooptiedoo, they have a low power dualcore at horrible clocks on 10nm  2010 called and wants its specs back.


Intel never said they'd launch a competitive 10nm product this year, did they? They just promise to be selling 10nm parts...


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 6, 2018)

TheLostSwede said:


> Intel never said they'd launch a competitive 10nm product this year, did they? They just promise to be selling 10nm parts...



Of course, but as always, I like to provide context


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 6, 2018)

TheLostSwede said:


> Intel never said they'd launch a competitive 10nm product this year, did they? They just promise to be selling 10nm parts...


Yes they did just a long time ago.


----------



## mouacyk (Dec 6, 2018)

Christmas is always earlier for some.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 6, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Your just plain wrong i have a b250 board and dual core kabylake g cekeron , i Was going to upgrade it with another 8 core socket 1151 but can't fit 7 series up?
> 
> 
> You need extreme cooling and a hell of a lot of patience to beat PBO on all core loaded clocks or single core, PBO wrings as much as possible as it is.


I have a 1200, best PBO is 3450, plus at 65w tdp 1,45v is not a problem.
Low end for the win.


----------



## londiste (Dec 6, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Coffe lake, Kaby lake and Skylake. All using the same LGA 1151 but not all compatible with all the boards that have that socket.


There are two different 1151 sockets. I guess the worst mistake Intel made was not making sockets physically different.


theoneandonlymrk said:


> Your just plain wrong i have a b250 board and dual core kabylake g cekeron , i Was going to upgrade it with another 8 core socket 1151 but can't fit 7 series up?


There are no Kaby Lake 8-core CPUs.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> There are two different 1151 sockets. I guess the worst mistake Intel made was not making sockets physically different.
> There are no Kaby Lake 8-core CPUs.


I meant 8 thread sorry.


----------



## HD64G (Dec 6, 2018)

GoldenX said:


> I have a 1200, best PBO is 3450, plus at 65w tdp 1,45v is not a problem.
> Low end for the win.


Maybe 4450 or 4350 the clock speed you intended to post?


----------



## Vario (Dec 6, 2018)

londiste said:


> There are two different 1151 sockets. I guess the worst mistake Intel made was not making sockets physically different.


Well they are physically different but not in an obvious way.  The 8th and 9th CPU are not compatible with the first and second gen without physical modification and a custom bios.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 6, 2018)

HD64G said:


> Maybe 4450 or 4350 the clock speed you intended to post?


R3 1200, 3100MHz, 3400MHz Turbo, 50MHz XFR, so max, 3450MHz. Best overclock with the stock cooler I could get was 4GHz (all cores, like usual). It's a Zen 1, not a Zen+.
Well, to be fair, I have it at 103MHz BCLK, so max is 3553MHz.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Dec 7, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Yes they did just a long time ago.



Ssshhhhh... Intel had hoped everyone had forgotten about that one. The focus is on 7nm now...


----------



## Vario (Dec 7, 2018)

GoldenX said:


> R3 1200, 3100MHz, 3400MHz Turbo, 50MHz XFR, so max, 3450MHz. Best overclock with the stock cooler I could get was 4GHz (all cores, like usual). It's a Zen 1, not a Zen+.
> Well, to be fair, I have it at 103MHz BCLK, so max is 3553MHz.


Still its about same as a year 2011 i5 2500K, right?  You can grab those for $35.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 7, 2018)

Vario said:


> Still its about same as a year 2011 i5 2500K, right?  You can grab those for $35.


Yes and no, with the 1200 I get better performance, and an upgrade path. I want to ditch the dGPU in the future and rely only on an IGP from an APU. No Intel IGP will help me with that.
Plus you don't get those used prices here.


----------



## Super XP (Dec 7, 2018)

Would love if these rumours were true. But 3 things that tell me something is amiss. 
TDP looks unrealistic. 
Price looks too low.
GPU specs don't make sense.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Dec 7, 2018)

Super XP said:


> Would love if these rumours were true. But 3 things that tell me something is amiss.
> TDP looks unrealistic.
> Price looks too low.
> GPU specs don't make sense.


Why the Gpu specs?


----------



## Super XP (Dec 7, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Why the Gpu specs?


Discrete GPUs specs similar to those integrated GPUs cost more. How can they drop the price so much and still make a profit. On top of actually selling with the CPU too.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 7, 2018)

Vario said:


> Still its about same as a year 2011 i5 2500K, right?  You can grab those for $35.



Yeah and no upgrades...


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 7, 2018)

Super XP said:


> Discrete GPUs specs similar to those integrated GPUs cost more. How can they drop the price so much and still make a profit. On top of actually selling with the CPU too.


It's not a full GPU price, the APU doesn't need power delivery (motherboard takes care of that), nor RAM. If a 14nm CCX could fit 11 CUs (I mean, the space used for a CCX used for the IGP), a 7nm one could fit 20.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Dec 8, 2018)

Super XP said:


> Would love if these rumours were true. But 3 things that tell me something is amiss.
> TDP looks unrealistic.
> Price looks too low.
> GPU specs don't make sense.



TDP looks inline with 7nm to me.
Prices also look inline with historical AMD pricing structure, actually top binned chips look like they got a good price bump UP.
GPU specs make sense looking at it from the perspective of a semi-custom chip derivative.


----------



## Melvis (Dec 8, 2018)

I think most of this Video is BS honestly, I dont think AMD is going to butcher there threadripper platform with Skt AM4 CPU's like Intel has done, there might be a little truth in it but I think for the most part its BS and agree with everything that Hardware unboxed says in this video.










I still think its going to be a most a 8core CPU with this Ryzen 3000 series just clocked higher, better IPC and a single CCX

I think that the Ryzen 7 3700 is actually a threadripper part and same with the Ryzen 9 3800 are also threadripper parts and the other 8 and 6 cores parts are actually the real Ryzen parts to me that seems more realistic.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 8, 2018)

They're not really butchering TR, TR has it's many advantages with extra PCIe lanes, quad channel memory, high(est) core count et al. The only problem with the current setup is the mem config on WX chips, that should be solved with the next gen. I believe TR 3xxx will be even better than most expectations.


----------



## mouacyk (Dec 8, 2018)

> *The Excel Spreadsheet "Ryzen Leak" was me. It is not a "leak"... it's a nerd who meant to only troll one friend. *


src: reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/a44f4b/the_excel_spreadsheet_ryzen_leak_was_me_it_is_not/


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 8, 2018)

That one was obliviously fake if you had more than one brain cell. 5Ghz 64 core TR ?


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 8, 2018)

There's 2 leaks if anyone bothered to see the video right till the end, AdoredTV talks about his sources (which he believes?) & contrasts it with the reddit leak.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 8, 2018)

AdoredTV is laughing all the way to the bank.

Step one: make shit up
Step two: hype the AMD community into hyper drive
Step three: watch the subscriber count goes up
Step four: profit

https://socialblade.com/youtube/user/adoredtv/monthly

Watch his stats around the last few days. 

AdoredTV, more like ConTV


----------



## TheLostSwede (Dec 8, 2018)

Melvis said:


> I still think its going to be a most a 8core CPU with this Ryzen 3000 series just clocked higher, better IPC and a single CCX



Well, I can tell you for a fact that you're wrong there.


----------



## Melvis (Dec 9, 2018)

TheLostSwede said:


> Well, I can tell you for a fact that you're wrong there.



Which part? and please link me to your facts.

I do remember reading on this forum  months ago that the new CCX units are going to be 8core each.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 9, 2018)

Melvis said:


> Which part? and please link me to your facts.
> 
> I do remember reading on this forum  months ago that the new CCX units are going to be 8core each.


For Threadripper/EPYC, it's not confirmed for Ryzen.


----------



## HTC (Dec 9, 2018)

GoldenX said:


> For Threadripper/EPYC, it's not confirmed for Ryzen.



*As far as we know*, the same chiplet concept is going to be used for pretty much all of AMD's lineup, much like current current CCXs for Zen / Zen + chips: as such, if Threadripper's / Epyc's use them, so will AM4's. What is uncertain is the IO portion on AM4's platform: still unknown, @ this time.

According to Kyle Bennet from [H]ardOCP, regarding Adored's video:



> There is a whole lot of reality in that video.  A lot. There is a little wrong, but not a lot.



https://hardforum.com/threads/adore...on-3000-series-leaks.1973015/#post-1043970615


----------



## TheLostSwede (Dec 9, 2018)

Melvis said:


> Which part? and please link me to your facts.
> 
> I do remember reading on this forum  months ago that the new CCX units are going to be 8core each.



It's going to be impossible to link you to any facts, but I'm telling you, you're wrong and then you can chose to believe me or not, as I know for a fact that your first belief is wrong. What I don't know, is what will be announced when, but as I posted elsewhere, there's truth to all the rumours, but as to what is true and as to what is not... Time will tell. I think most people will be a bit surprised with what AMD has coming, I was. I have a feeling that a lot of people will be upgrading their motherboards, alongside getting a new CPU. I really wish I could spill the beans, but it's way too early.


----------



## Final_Fighter (Dec 9, 2018)

given the fact that epyc rome is 8 core per ccx its easy to see amd make a 16 core part. also i think amd will cannibalize its tr4 socket because they are not exactly the best selling parts. something else that does not get  to much attention is the potential refinement of the infinity fabric. then there is the possibility of running some sort of high speed edram like the i7-5775c did. using a high frequency module as a buffer for the infinity fabric could also bring overall latency down. tho making adjustments to this edram module may require a new board to simpy adjust its frequency but the new chips will work with existing am4 boards just they cant adjust the edram.

edit: this along with the ipc increase and frequency bump will make it a very appealing product as long as the price does not get out of control.

just some random thoughts on the matter. i always thought that running a edram would help with the high latency. maybe that big extra die in the middle of the rome proc has some sort of onboard ram for this very purpose.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 9, 2018)

Melvis said:


> Which part? and please link me to your facts.
> 
> I do remember reading on this forum  months ago that the new *CCX* units are going to be *8core* each.


That's kind of irrelevant because there's nearly 100% chance that (mainstream) desktop CPU & APU will not be monolithic dies. They will be MCM just like the current lineup & will have a separate I/O die with MC & possibly L4 cache. 16 cores makes sense because AMD is fighting the "moar core" wars & they're winning.


----------



## Melvis (Dec 11, 2018)

TheLostSwede said:


> It's going to be impossible to link you to any facts, but I'm telling you, you're wrong and then you can chose to believe me or not, as I know for a fact that your first belief is wrong. What I don't know, is what will be announced when, but as I posted elsewhere, there's truth to all the rumours, but as to what is true and as to what is not... Time will tell. I think most people will be a bit surprised with what AMD has coming, I was. I have a feeling that a lot of people will be upgrading their motherboards, alongside getting a new CPU. I really wish I could spill the beans, but it's way too early.



Well if you cant link me to any facts but your telling me im wrong and your saying it is fact what your saying but cant actually prove to any of us that it is then im sorry I dont buy what your selling. Its like me saying I know for a fact that im right and you just gotta believe me that I am, even if I cant prove that to you, see what Im getting at here?  It cant be fact if you cant back it up with evidence.....



R0H1T said:


> That's kind of irrelevant because there's nearly 100% chance that (mainstream) desktop CPU & APU will not be monolithic dies. They will be MCM just like the current lineup & will have a separate I/O die with MC & possibly L4 cache. 16 cores makes sense because AMD is fighting the "moar core" wars & they're winning.



You do realize that the current CCX for Zen 2 are 8core CCX's right? It doesnt make sense actually because they have threadripper to fight the "moar core" war and already led the way on the main stream desktop for cores till only just a month ago or so. I cant see them butchering there threadripper platform and making it a pointless platform for people to buy into when they can just get a AM4 socket and get the same amount of cores for less, it just doesnt add up. Yes its possible but I dont think they will do it.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 11, 2018)

Melvis said:


> Well if you cant link me to any facts but your telling me im wrong and your saying it is fact what your saying but cant actually prove to any of us that it is then im sorry I dont buy what your selling. Its like me saying I know for a fact that im right and you just gotta believe me that I am, even if I cant prove that to you, see what Im getting at here?  It cant be fact if you cant back it up with evidence.....
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that the current CCX for Zen 2 are 8core CCX's right? It doesnt make sense actually because they have threadripper to fight the "moar core" war and already led the way on the main stream desktop for cores till only just a month ago or so. I cant see them butchering there threadripper platform and making it a pointless platform for people to buy into when they can just get a AM4 socket and get the same amount of cores for less, it just doesnt add up. Yes its possible but I dont think they will do it.


No they're 8 core "chiplets" while CCX is different ~










This distinction is important because IMO AMD can't use an 8 core CCX for notebook or embedded chips, that's a huge market & having different CCX layouts could potentially be more expensive for AMD to work with, not to mention designing (entire) chips with them is more complicated. Do note that CCX layout isn't revealed for Zen2 but that might happen at CES.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Dec 11, 2018)

Melvis said:


> Well if you cant link me to any facts but your telling me im wrong and your saying it is fact what your saying but cant actually prove to any of us that it is then im sorry I dont buy what your selling. Its like me saying I know for a fact that im right and you just gotta believe me that I am, even if I cant prove that to you, see what Im getting at here?  It cant be fact if you cant back it up with evidence.....
> 
> You do realize that the current CCX for Zen 2 are 8core CCX's right? It doesnt make sense actually because they have threadripper to fight the "moar core" war and already led the way on the main stream desktop for cores till only just a month ago or so. I cant see them butchering there threadripper platform and making it a pointless platform for people to buy into when they can just get a AM4 socket and get the same amount of cores for less, it just doesnt add up. Yes its possible but I dont think they will do it.



Well, I guess you don't know who I am, so that's understandable. That said, you're still off the mark, hopefully you'll be happy with what is launched though.
You should look up where I live and that might give you a better understanding of what I'm saying actually means something.

I don't work for AMD and what may or may not make sense for them, is not for me to say. I took the video as pure BS to start with as well, but it turns out he's gotten some good info. Is it all correct? No. But it's far from all wrong as well. Keep in mind that cores isn't everything that matters, that said, PCIe 4.0 will make the AM4 platform a lot more attractive to consumers. I would go as far as to say that most of the wrongs with the platform have been righted. I really wish I could share more, but it could get people in trouble and I don't want, it's so awkward. I do hope you remember what I said when AMD launches their new products though, which is unlikely to be as soon as the vide suggests btw. AMD might even stretch things out until the end of 2019 to have some new things here and there to keep people excited/upset about...


----------

