AMD should have ditched PCI-e 5.0 on B650 and released them along with X670 on day 1, not to mention that everything bellow 7950X should have been $50 lower.
The other thing they could have done, was make only the B650E DDR5, while B650 should have stayed with DDR4.
Releasing 3D CPUs on day 1 would have helped as well.

Entire PC industry has slowed down ~20%. In last two years, entire world has upgraded their tech gear during Covid and record revenues were posted before. This can never last ferever. It comes and goes in cycles. Unfortunate things about all launches this season are conflating global circumstances, energy crisis, squeezed household budgets, inflation and higher costs of more advanved technologies. It is what it is.

Prices on AM5 will have to go down for Black Friday, Xmas and onwards if all companies involved in selling products want to sell anything meaningful. It is right that people are not buying enthusiastically at the moment.

Who bets that 7800XT GPU will cost $999 and cause a disturbance in the Force?

HenrySomeoneSome of us have been saying this ever since the first rumors regarding the overall platform cost appeared - it's simply too high to appeal to anyone but the most ardent fanboys (and even then, just those that are at least reasonably well off at that) and what do you know, this is exactly what's happening now! :p

But it wasn't that high early on, in fact, it was quite reasonable for all the extras that are included.
Now it's just dumb though in most cases.
Z790 doesn't appear to be winning many value awards either though.

PumperAMD should have ditched PCI-e 5.0 on B650 and released them along with X670 on day 1, not to mention that everything bellow 7950X should have been $50 lower.
The other thing they could have done, was make only the B650E DDR5, while B650 should have stayed with DDR4.
Releasing 3D CPUs on day 1 would have helped as well.

PCIe 5.0 for one NVMe drive isn't going to add more than maybe a couple of bucks to the overall board cost, so it doesn't make sense dropping it for B650.
AMD doesn't seem to like adding dual standard memory controllers to their CPUs.

HenrySomeoneSome of us have been saying this ever since the first rumors regarding the overall platform cost appeared - it's simply too high to appeal to anyone but the most ardent fanboys (and even then, just those that are at least reasonably well off at that) and what do you know, this is exactly what's happening now! :p

And the same can be expected from Intel, it's just AMD right now is the one saying it and reacting to current market conditions as they are now.
More guys like us will be hanging onto what we have because of the increase in prices industry-wide and that applies to most anything, not just stuff solely related to PC hardware.

Intel is certainly no saint when it comes to pricing as history has proven as fact but regardless, with the current state of economics "As Is", we'll see the trend of market slowdown continue and deepen as well.
Christmas will help to extend sales to a point but even that won't be as before unless you're one that already has deep pockets to purchase stuff with - Or a nice nest egg saved up to purchase something to that end.

It's really not a AMD or Intel thing - It's the entire market and what's up with it is being reflected here.

Tek-CheckWho bets that 7800XT GPU will cost $999 and cause a disturbance in the Force?

I will not buy it. Anything more than the classic pricing of $650 is robbery to me.

Of course, they can charge any sum, even $1999. That will guarantee exactly 0 sales.

ARFI will not buy it. Anything more than the classic pricing of $650 is robbery to me.

Of course, they can charge any sum, even $1999. That will guarantee exactly 0 sales.

as long as performance is 30% better with ray tracing off in majority of games, I'd be happy to be $899... that's about my max though... maybe $999 if they have some cool new feature like DLSS3 they reveal November 3rd.

Otherwise I will be going with the $799 (I assume) the non-xt variant will go for if the XT variant went for $999.

CallandorWoTLisa Su if you read this: Integrated graphics wasn't the answer, Intel already has that market, and you have APU's, you should have simply made a budget APU and marketed that to businesses directly. We want the 7800X3D. We would have all given you our money if you had done this on launch day. Saving it for next year was a mistake, because many of us have the upgrade itch and will probably go with Raptor Lake if the price is right at the 6 and 8 core model ranges (the 95 celsius thing will turn away casual users). I personally want a F model Intel, because integrated graphics have given me trouble in high refresh gaming in the past.

Sigh. six figure employees these companies have, and it takes some history major to give them the answer.

IMO, all you gave here was a pat on your own back.
No one ever thought that the graphics in Ryzen 7000 would be a significant feature, as it was known from early on that wouldn't have performance close to the latest APU. Even AMD said this.
As it has been pointed out elsewhere, AMD isn't saving the 7000X3D for later, it simply isn't finished.
Neither Ryzen 7000 nor Raptor Lake are meant to be budget alternatives at launch.

None of this has anything to do with the actual mistakes AMD has done, with the bad timing of the B650 boards being a primary one.

CallandorWoTIntel stock is rising,

No.

Looks like these multi-billionaire companies think that the people have lot of money to spend these days.
The current gen AMD and Intel cpus are so good that there is no need at all to upgrade an entire system.
For a gaming rig most of the times is enough to buy a more powerful gpu. If someone needs a better cpu, he can always buy a more powerful one for the same socket.
No need to spend a fortune for a next gen system. Sometimes you can make your machine faster changing only few things. And there is the used market too for this.

trsttteWhen the 5800x3D beats/equals the 7950x is most gaming benchmarks and AMD themselves already teased 3D cache versions of zen4 why would anyone jump to upgrade right now when the entire platform is so overpriced?

I know this is very difficult for many people here to understand but there are actual CPU usage cases other than gaming.

There isn't a single CPU model that is best for everything which is why AMD and Intel sell more than one model. Same with GPUs. And this isn't limited the computer industry.

If you visit these companies' websites, there is usually a Solutions section that will describe what some of those other usage cases are.

In fact, just adding a post to TPU is a non-gaming usage case. The 5800X3D isn't any better at this than the Intel Core i7 in my Mac mini 2018 that I am using to type this response. It just chews up more electricity.

I realize this sounds unbelievable, but there are actual people who use computers and don't play games on them. At all. Not even solitaire let alone Apex Legends or Elden Ring. Shocking, isn't it?

it's the path AMD take for the future... Otherwise DDR5 prices will never go lower...

it will take the time for a while...

If only we could have seen this one coming.

TheLostSwedeHaven't checked today, but zero cards in Sweden this past weekend.

Scalper wave hit, but the cards are simply not sold, whether they sit at retailers or some weird ass site isn't the point.

The point is, the initial wave is NOT sold out. You can buy the GPU at $2k which really isn't too far off what Nvidia placed it at. The price is just a point the market won't bear, evident by the scalper 4090 availability and the low, but present inventory at shops. People ain't lining up in queues too much and demand is 'okay' at best.

Just shot this one, retail is scalping just the same ;)

Why would demand not drop like a rock?

Ryzen 7000 processors just matched the 5800X3D speed in gaming, and there are very few people with any real productivity needs greater than that.

And the whole platform costs just skyrocketed. Basic motherboards that were promised for $120 are now $200, memory sticks aren't getting any cheaper, SSD advertised speeds don't bring any difference in load times or better user experience...

Rahmat SofyanOtherwise DDR5 prices will never go lower...

it will take the time for a while...

Personally ddr5 in this time are trash because dont offer so much compared ddr4 and only seems more interesting since 6400mhz but again personally only consider when stay at 7200mhz

www.newegg.com/team-32gb/p/N82E16820331923?Item=N82E16820331923

this model have cas 34 (i bet for 1.45v) but in my case cas latencies between 38 to 40 in 7200mhz but with 1.35v no more are ok compared my gskill ddr4 3600 cas 18

but many sources inform about many ddr5 mainboards have troubles with memories up to 6400mhz, some information talks about only mainboards with more than 8 layers and 2oz of copper* can support it aka very expensive mainboards

:)

cvaldesI know this is very difficult for many people here to understand but there are actual CPU usage cases other than gaming.

There isn't a single CPU model that is best for everything which is why AMD and Intel sell more than one model. Same with GPUs. And this isn't limited the computer industry.

If you visit these companies' websites, there is usually a Solutions section that will describe what some of those other usage cases are.

In fact, just adding a post to TPU is a non-gaming usage case. The 5800X3D isn't any better at this than the Intel Core i7 in my Mac mini 2018 that I am using to type this response. It just chews up more electricity.

But the driver of initial sales and where the demand varies more wildly is retail which is mostly focused on gaming. Workstations upgrade on a schedulle and are much more predictable (which is not to say orders are not being canceled/delayed because of the overall economic situation)

trsttteBut the driver of initial sales and where the demand varies more wildly is retail which is mostly focused on gaming.

I wouldn't be so sure of that, my last few purchases over the last half a decade had nothing to do with gaming & AMD's DC revenues grew what ~50 percent last quarter or so?

cvaldesI know this is very difficult for many people here to understand but there are actual CPU usage cases other than gaming.

There isn't a single CPU model that is best for everything which is why AMD and Intel sell more than one model. Same with GPUs. And this isn't limited the computer industry.

If you visit these companies' websites, there is usually a Solutions section that will describe what some of those other usage cases are.

In fact, just adding a post to TPU is a non-gaming usage case. The 5800X3D isn't any better at this than the Intel Core i7 in my Mac mini 2018 that I am using to type this response. It just chews up more electricity.

I realize this sounds unbelievable, but there are actual people who use computers and don't play games on them. At all. Not even solitaire let alone Apex Legends or Elden Ring. Shocking, isn't it?

Right but the % doing high performance tasks on a CPU is rather limited, while gaming is ubiquitous in performant systems/CPUs. Its one of the primary reasons consumer segment buys them.

Fact is, its HEDT use cases that have invaded the MSDT space right now. Its certainly not a norm by any means.

For that very reason Intel was making do with quad cores for a decade. They had extreme 6~8 core CPUs. The niche was too small to care about. And for the exact same reasons the FX processors flopped so hard. They sucked at gaming/ST and nobody needed eight cores.

But at its core... you speak of models and stuff. Honestly, all CPUs are the same shit in a different package. They crunch numbers, and they want to do good at crunching mostly the same numbers through very similar instruction sets. Its not complicated at all; EPYC is Zen albeit with some expansions and extra features, but its core is the same. And then your HTPC runs on a tiny slice of that very same thing with some iGP added on top. The entire CPU business is built on that very principle; you build one chip (core, is more apt now) to serve them all, and you either have enough or too little perf for the task at hand. And here's the thing: people buy CPUs based on the highest performance level they think they need, which is often gaming (primary: ST); the only differentiator after that is the number of cores, and for that people will want enough for all tasks they throw at it. That's all there is to it; but any real time task is going to be the most vital one, because you notice it if you come up short. If decode/encode takes longer, who cares. If your FPS drops to 3, you'll hate it.

We've hit the point where the cost of making "enthusiast" parts is just out of the range of most people but does fine to corporate clients. Bring on the cloud gaming that's been worked on and promised and end the frace.

cvaldesI know this is very difficult for many people here to understand but there are actual CPU usage cases other than gaming.

There isn't a single CPU model that is best for everything which is why AMD and Intel sell more than one model. Same with GPUs.

If you visit these companies' websites, there is usually a Solutions section that will describe what some of those other usage cases are.

In fact, just adding a post to TPU is a non-gaming usage case. The 5800X3D isn't any better at this than the Intel Core i7 in my Mac mini 2018 that I am using to type this response. It just chews up more electricity.

According to your specs you have a 5900X. How then can you talk about the 5800X3D? Are you sure about the power draw. At idle the 5800X3D does not consume much energy at all. It certainly draws less power than the 5900X or 5950X while Gaming too. Chivalry 2 got put on Game Pass and added 500,000 users in 1 day so there are plenty of customers for the Gaming focused CPUs. I do agree that there are CPUs for specific use cases but it should be addendum and not user features. That however does not take away from the fact that the 5800X3D is an absolute beast at Gaming. For Productivity AM5 and likely 13th Gen will be great for that but going on Youtube Channels . Why do I wax on about the 5800X3D. Is it really that good at Gaming vs the other chips? In short yes. When I can pan across the entire map in TWWH3 Immortal Empires with no glitching or play C2077 @ 4K 165 fps o high with my 5800X3D I can't wait to see what 7000 GPUs.

I am not disagreeing with your position but Gaming is the first paragraph in the narrative when it comes to all DIY PC parts today.

SOAREVERSORWe've hit the point where the cost of making "enthusiast" parts is just out of the range of most people but does fine to corporate clients. Bring on the cloud gaming that's been worked on and promised and end the frace.

Stadia was just deleted, Geforce NOW is struggling and the rest is highly questionable. I reckon MS has some chance to remain because they also run their own hardware, but honestly, gaming as a service? Fk that.

Note how Netflix and other on demand services are also fighting over share and how it impacts their offerings. You really don't want to go knee deep into this at all.

watzupkenAgree that the pricing isn’t great. But what if AMD will support AM5 longer than Intel, like they did with AM4? I have a sense the reason why the motherboards are so expensive is because of the supposed backward compatibility. It is a double edged sword. If you are a motherboard maker and you know that there may be little need for people to buy a new board as frequently, what would you do? You either make sure the board fails on time, or you price in the lost of sale. Board makers made the mistake with AM4 when they dipped their toes with AMD Ryzen when introducing the 300 and 400 series chipsets at low prices, only to have to support them to Zen 3, which is 4 generations of CPUs, and also APUs.

I didn't say I agree or disagree with the board makers. I only posed my explanation as to why Ryzen 7000 isn't selling well.
Though if these board makers priced themselves out of the market, their strategy wasn't the best regardless.

reap what you sow, AMD!

kapone32According to your specs you have a 5900X. How then can you talk about the 5800X3D? Are you sure about the power draw. At idle the 5800X3D does not consume much energy at all. It certainly draws less power than the 5900X or 5950X while Gaming too. Chivalry 2 got put on Game Pass and added 500,000 users in 1 day so there are plenty of customers for the Gaming focused CPUs. I do agree that there are CPUs for specific use cases but it should be addendum and not user features. That however does not take away from the fact that the 5800X3D is an absolute beast at Gaming. For Productivity AM5 and likely 13th Gen will be great for that but going on Youtube Channels . Why do I wax on about the 5800X3D. Is it really that good at Gaming vs the other chips? In short yes. When I can pan across the entire map in TWWH3 Immortal Empires with no glitching or play C2077 @ 4K 165 fps o high with my 5800X3D I can't wait to see what 7000 GPUs.

Uh, I have multiple builds. I only listed one in my System Specs. It's my primary gaming computer but actually the computer I use the least. I use my Mac more frequently than any of my PCs but in the context of TechPowerUp's discussion forums and its audience, it's probably better for me to list a Windows PC.

I know the PPT of the CPUs in my various builds both at idle and at peak load (during a Cinebench R23 benchmark or a Handbrake encode). Intel Power Gadget also provides similar data for the Core i7 in my Mac.

I'm not even sure about the idle power consumption between the 5800X3D and 5900X since I don't have both in front of me. I do know that 5900X has two 6-core chiplets and one chiplet shuts down during periods of low activity. The 5800X3D is based on one 8-core chiplet like others in the 5700 and 5800 series.

However, an 5900X is going to outperform the 5800X3D for certain workloads, particularly MT ones that benefit from extra cores and don't need that massive cache. I bought my 5900X a year before the 5800X3D came out. Do I wish I have the latter for gaming? Yes, sure. But I decided that the pros and cons of my 5900X leaned toward me keeping it. One can throw money forever in the incessant pursuit of higher fps scores. I consider the build described in my System Specs as satisfactory for my current gaming needs.

AMD's decision to cut back on Zen 4 production is based on a wide drop in demand not just gamers.

Once again, the universe does not do what you do with your computer. Yours is not the sole usage case on this planet. I wish more people online would understand that. This is a curious myopia that is far more prevalent in people discussing computers.

Like I said, there are people who don't prioritize gaming performance or don't even game at all.

I don't game on my Mac mini. But from a performance-per-watt perspective, it's far outperforms any of my desktop Windows PCs for posting comments like this one on the Internet.

I'm really 50%-50% as to if we are going to have 3 V-Cache models (7950X3D/7900X3D/7800X3D) or just 7800X3D.
If AMD increase the PPT of 7800X3D to 230W it will not have to make regression in frequency like in 5000 series case.
But even in this case (no actual frequency reduction) i don't see more than +18% in 720p and +12.5% in 1080p TPU testbed vs 7700X based on performance increase that V-Cache brought to 5000 series!
Cores and frequency doesn't help much Zen4 in gaming as you can see below and if we are going to see 7900X3D and 7950X3D probably there will be regression in actual clocks vs the regular 7950X/7900X models due to not having PPT increase.
So the gaming performance difference it will be nearly equivalent to 7800X3D (if 7800X3D actual clocks are similar to 7700X)
In a few days we are going to see the Raptor Lake results, but if for example 13700K/KF is 10% faster vs 12700K/KF in 720p (around 6.9% in 1080p) this means that in 1080p 13700K/KF will be just -5% (or even less) from 7800X3D on average!
13600K box street price ($329) is exactly what Intel recommends in their website, so partners can match Intel's RCP and this is the only part that Intel increased pricing in relation with 12th gen so far, so there is a reason partners to have low margins.
13700K/KF models have not seen an increase in price and also they are very competitive across the stack and probably will force for example 12900K to drop to 13700K level or less since 13700K will be a little bit faster (their RCP difference is $180, so the drop will be big).So partners regarding 13700K have not an incentive to play with such low margins as in i5 13600K's case but if reason arise (Zen4 V-Cache), they can sell 13700KF as low as $399!
Even if 7800X3D has only $100 SEP difference with 7700X, paying $100 more for 7800X3D vs 13700KF will just get you 5% (max) in 1080p average TPU results while if you use that $100 difference to upgrade to the next VGA tier (for example RX6750X->RX 6800 or 3070Ti->3080 10GB etc)
will get far superior gaming upgrade.
And all this without touching the motherboard/memory side cost options difference...
So AMD needs to drop prices all over, Zen4 V-Cache models won't save them if the pricing strategy doesn't change!

Tsukiyomi91reap what you sow, AMD!

Hi,
If there was a defense they did say nobody could afford bitchin high core chips long ago :laugh: