Sunday, March 25th 2018

AMD Ryzen 7 "2800X" Not Part of First Wave

AMD is preparing to launch its first wave of 12 nm Ryzen 2000-series "Pinnacle Ridge" processors in April, with possible availability on the 19th. From all of the materials leaked to the web, it's becoming clear that the Ryzen 7 2700X will be the company's next flagship socket AM4 processor, with a "2800X" not being part of the first wave of "Pinnacle Ridge" chips. Adding further to the theory of the first wave of "Pinnacle Ridge" chips being led by the 2700X, is the leaked cover of the next issue of print magazine CanardPC, which screams "2700X," and includes a roundup of second-generation Ryzen parts from 2200G all the way through the 2700X. The 2700X, besides process and minor architectural refinements, also features higher clocks than the current company flagship in the segment, the Ryzen 7 1800X. It's clocked at 3.70 GHz base, with 4.35 GHz boost, and XFR 2.0 driving the clocks up even further, compared to the 3.60/4.00/4.20 GHz (base/boost/max-XFR) of the 1800X. For this reason alone, the 2700X will be a faster part.

AMD has the advantage of having sized up Intel's Core i7-8700K before deciding to lead with the 2700X. The possible 2800X will depend on Intel's short-term response to the 2700X. There were rumors late last year of a possible speed-bumped "Core i7-8720K." AMD's first wave of Ryzen 2000-series "Pinnacle Ridge" will be as brisk as Intel's first "Coffee Lake" desktop processors, with just four SKUs - the Ryzen 7 2700X, the Ryzen 7 2700, the Ryzen 5 2600X, and the Ryzen 5 2600. Besides higher clocks, the chips could feature a minor IPC uplift (vs. first-generation "Summit Ridge") thanks to rumored faster (lower-latency) caches, support for higher memory clocks, updated Precision Boost algorithms, and XFR 2.0.
Add your own comment

71 Comments on AMD Ryzen 7 "2800X" Not Part of First Wave

#51
Fx
This is unfortunate. I would definitely go straight to the 2800X if they released it this wave. These days, I don't have the interest to overclock and just want the highest base frequency out of the box that is rated at <125W.
Posted on Reply
#52
jabbadap
BiggieShady65 W TDP for R7 looks great even for 12nm ...

105 W / 65 W = 1.615
4.35 GHz / 4.1 GHz = 1.06

95 W / 65 W = 1.4615
4.25 GHz / 3.9 GHz = 1.09

So for X models we have 6% more performance for 61.5% more juice with R7 ... or 9% more performance for 46.15% more juice with R5
Uhm that is kind of flawed comparison. You are using single core clock and whole chip tdp. X models boosts higher all cores than non-X models(Precision boost overdrive) and that tdp will be reached all cores working rather than single core tasks.
Posted on Reply
#53
BiggieShady
jabbadapUhm that is kind of flawed comparison. You are using single core clock and whole chip tdp. X models boosts higher all cores than non-X models(Precision boost overdrive) and that tdp will be reached all cores working rather than single core tasks.
You are right ... that was for single threaded load, if we use low clocks for all cores load, X R7 gets 15% more perf, and X R5 gets 6% more perf ... TDP ratios stays the same because all cores are same.
Posted on Reply
#54
TheLaughingMan
BiggieShady65 W TDP for R7 looks great even for 12nm ...

105 W / 65 W = 1.615
4.35 GHz / 4.1 GHz = 1.06

95 W / 65 W = 1.4615
4.25 GHz / 3.9 GHz = 1.09

So for X models we have 6% more performance for 61.5% more juice with R7 ... or 9% more performance for 46.15% more juice with R5
TDP for AMD is and always has been entirely about the Thermal Design Power and what it will take to cool it. It does not denote a need for more power. So you have proven the new chips will reach higher clocks and generate more heat when they do. Which is exactly how that works for any system that moves something faster than before with no change in the number of moving parts.
Posted on Reply
#55
BiggieShady
TheLaughingManTDP for AMD is and always has been entirely about the Thermal Design Power and what it will take to cool it. It does not denote a need for more power. So you have proven the new chips will reach higher clocks and generate more heat when they do. Which is exactly how that works for any system that moves something faster than before with no change in the number of moving parts.
I wasn't trying to prove a point ... I'm kinda trying to figure out how they managed to have 65W TDP on R7
Posted on Reply
#56
R0H1T
BiggieShadyI wasn't trying to prove a point ... I'm kinda trying to figure out how they managed to have 65W TDP on R7
Lower clocks, turbo & no (enhanced) XFR2 perhaps? Besides TDP doesn't correspond to much, other than the kind of cooling some chips may require.
Posted on Reply
#57
jabbadap
BiggieShadyI wasn't trying to prove a point ... I'm kinda trying to figure out how they managed to have 65W TDP on R7
Well if you look tpus r7 1800x reviewsingle core power consumption for that is very low(64W for whole machine on superpi). So that 65W TDP and 4.1GHz single core is quite easy task. But what do you think is all core clocks for such a chip(Well it's obviously over that base clock of 3.2GHz).
Posted on Reply
#58
bug
SDR82As soon as I see TDP in the comments I'm like : "Yip, here we go (again)...they think TDP = Power draw". CPU TDP is the maximum amount of heat generated by that CPU. Higher TDP = Needs better cooling. The i5-8600K and the i7-8700K both have a TDP of 95W, but during wPrime testing the i5 consumes 114W while the i7 consumes 150W. www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8600K/16.html
Yeah, I mean any five grader should be able to figure that one out. I mean, just because you have to dissipate 105W, doesn't necessarily mean you're drawing that amount from somewhere. Surely part of that is the pixie dust inside doing its thing.
Posted on Reply
#59
BiggieShady
bugSurely part of that is the pixie dust inside doing its thing.
You got it ...
jabbadapSo that 65W TDP and 4.1GHz single core is quite easy task.
Well 65W TDP for a 8c/16t chip all cores at 100% at stock, they did it with R7 1700 at 3.0/3.7 and now at 3.2/4.1 ... not bad
Posted on Reply
#60
TheLaughingMan
In the end, there are too damn many ways to fudge the numbers for TDP and there is no regulation or set rules to govern it. So it comes down to what you can get away with telling your customers and not piss them off. I personally ignore TDP and just overbuild my computer from the start. My CPU coolers TDP rating is something 220W+ so I should be good no matter how far the fudged.
Posted on Reply
#61
Melvis
Hmmmm I had planned to get the highest end Ryzen+ CPU on a B450 or X470 Mobo this year as an upgrade to my FX 8350 but if they delay the 2800X by to much then I might as well wait for Zen 2. I can still play all my games without any issues on the 8350 but an upgrade would be nice. What to do....
Posted on Reply
#62
R0H1T
MelvisHmmmm I had planned to get the highest end Ryzen+ CPU on a B450 or X470 Mobo this year as an upgrade to my FX 8350 but if they delay the 2800X by to much then I might as well wait for Zen 2. I can still play all my games without any issues on the 8350 but an upgrade would be nice. What to do....
  • Wait for tapegate to boil over.
  • Wait for RAM prices to cool down.
Posted on Reply
#63
TheLaughingMan
R0H1T
  • Wait for tapegate to boil over.
  • Wait for RAM prices to cool down.
Tapegate? What does Nascar have to do with any of this?
Posted on Reply
#64
Fx
MelvisHmmmm I had planned to get the highest end Ryzen+ CPU on a B450 or X470 Mobo this year as an upgrade to my FX 8350 but if they delay the 2800X by to much then I might as well wait for Zen 2. I can still play all my games without any issues on the 8350 but an upgrade would be nice. What to do....
I'm in the exact same boat. I think I'm willing to do 2800X if comes out, else I may consider the 2700X. All of the games I play also play smooth enough with a 980 Ti. Like you, I will wait for Zen2 if I have to. I am getting some serious upgrade itch though!
Posted on Reply
#65
xrror
They need those dies for the next ThreadRipper. Duh ;)

Seriously, since the current ThreadRipper parts are high-bin 4.2Ghz Ryzen 1 parts, they MUST concisely beat that. My uneducated stab in the dark out of my rear end guess is a fully stable 4.6Ghz 8 core (16thread) Ryzen 1.5 part (all cores, base speed) is nearing the max (might not even be possible) so anything approaching that == reserved for future ThreadRipper.

Also for people arguing about TDP... TDP doesn't mean what you think it does anymore. It used to mean Total Design Power - which was the maximum pathological absolute max power draw you could get a given chip to draw at a given voltage from the socket, it was the absolute max that a given chassis/mobo/socket would ever need to handle for a given part. So old school system could handle TPD you were covered.

Intel changed it to "Typical" Design Power somewhere around ... (actually I can't remember, core 2 era?) ... because consumers/popcorn press weren't (*cough*) informed enough, and it became TDP == battery life. Higher TDP == bad. Also it's where they started seriously competing with ARM, and marketing wise it looked bad.

ANYWAY what I mean to get at, is TDP became an arbitrary measure, since you don't know what "typical" actually IS now.
Posted on Reply
#66
Basard
I say they are bringing back the FX lineup. 260w TDP. Included in the suitcase they deliver will be a 360mm AIO.
Posted on Reply
#67
zo0lykas
How long you want wait,? And what price drop you want see?
If you fallow new's ram price never will be as 2-3 years ago.
R0H1T
  • Wait for tapegate to boil over.
  • Wait for RAM prices to cool down.
Posted on Reply
#68
svan71
Vayra86Precisely what I was getting at ;)



That's a five year old CPU @ 22nm you're comparing to now...
Intels CURRENT 8 core is a 140 watt part.
Posted on Reply
#69
the cores & threads
I wish AMD would get their 2700X, and or 2800X..?.. to around 4.5ghz steadymaybe even 4.7ghz boost? That would be some awesome performance? And when I take a look in the past well this is the first time in a long time that AMD has came out with something really good?, and I suspect that they most likely will take these 4 years, and get the most out of them by 300mhz. increments to hopefully down the road be somewhere very respectful so in 2020 we can all look back and remember a time in 2017 when AMD came back with a really good processor so the average guy like me can feel what it's like to run with the group of people that have all that expensive awesome hardware for a little less..:)..? I saved up for 18 months so I could put my Ryzen 1700X in a nice motherboard, ram, and solid state SSD, and it was all worth it.!!! Now I have to save up for the 2700X....??? And the one after that...lol..Maybe?? I don't know if it will happen?, but if AMD goes anywhere close to 5ghz on boost..? Well then they really out did themselves taking into account all those cores...But it would nice if they had one processor that did it....?
Posted on Reply
#70
purecain
the 1800x chips invariably had better memory controllers... imo... i seemed to hit 3466 pretty easily compared to others using b-die on this chipset...
imo anyway...:toast:
Posted on Reply
#71
nemesis.ie
Agreed, mine will do 3600Mhz with the XMP timings it's rated for (Team 3733MHz modules).
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jul 18th, 2024 03:40 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts