AMD is Saving the Ryzen 7 2800X for a Rainy Day

[Chino]

Many of you might have noticed that the Ryzen 7 2800X wasn't part of the initial Ryzen 2000 Series launch yesterday. Jim Anderson, Senior Vice President at AMD, has hinted that AMD might release the Ryzen 7 2800X processor at a later date. The main reason for the move is that the current Ryzen 7 2700X and 2700 models already cover the performance and price points. Therefore, AMD doesn't see the need to release a more powerful model at this time. And they're not wrong. Our review of the Ryzen 7 2700X revealed that AMD's current flagship processor has surpassed Intel's Core i7-8700K in multi-threaded workloads while also closing the gap in single-threaded workloads. While Intel still has the advantage when it comes to gaming performance, the difference in performance is slim and gets even smaller as you climb the resolution ladder. Basically, the ball is in Intel's court right now. Whether the Ryzen 7 2800X see the light of the day is going to depend on Intel's response to the Ryzen 7 2700X.


View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[T4C Fantasy]

im going to assume that they will make the 2800X a 10 core variant, on air the 2700X seems to be limited to 4.3 which its boost is already at.

which means a 10 core mainstream chip, AMD is killing it if they do that

 

[W1zzard]

im going to assume that they will make the 2800X a 10 core variant, on air the 2700X seems to be limited to 4.3 which its boost is already at.

which means a 10 core mainstream chip, AMD is killing it if they do that

Nah, this would mean new silicon and everything. I'd expect it to be just a higher bin of Pinnacle Ridge

 

[cdawall]

Nah, this would mean new silicon and everything. I'd expect it to be just a higher bin of Pinnacle Ridge

I would be more curious if we are looking at a binning issue with AMD and that is the release delay.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

Nah, this would mean new silicon and everything. I'd expect it to be just a higher bin of Pinnacle Ridge

yeah true, and they cant just use 2 chips it wouldnt fit

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

im going to assume that they will make the 2800X a 10 core variant, on air the 2700X seems to be limited to 4.3 which its boost is already at.

which means a 10 core mainstream chip, AMD is killing it if they do that

i would bet that the 2800 could be TR4 socket. To get 10 cores they would need to use Threadripper architecture.

 

[cdawall]

i would bet that the 2800 could be TR4 socket. To get 10 cores they would need to use Threadripper architecture.

I wouldn't. I would bet they just cannot maintain enough supply to launch the product.

 

[pjl321]

im going to assume that they will make the 2800X a 10 core variant, on air the 2700X seems to be limited to 4.3 which its boost is already at.

which means a 10 core mainstream chip, AMD is killing it if they do that

They could be highly cherry picked parts, maybe 4.5GHz maybe more. A core increase would mean an entirely different chip which is way more work than its worth for a single chip and as Threadripper isn't coming to 12nm (ttbomk) i don't see this being an option.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

They could be highly cheery picked parts, maybe 4.5GHz maybe more. A core increase would mean an entirely different chip which is way more work than its worth for a single chip and as Threadripper isn't coming to 12nm (ttbomk) i don't see this being an option.

atleast AMD is doing what intel isnt, giving us old architecture but more cores for the EE, in reality a 7980XE is a 6980XE and etc.. i hate intel for that crap.

Threadripper is the same micro arch as the Ryzen counterparts...

 

[ghazi]

i would bet that the 2800 could be TR4 socket. To get 10 cores they would need to use Threadripper architecture.

10 cores is not possible. You would have to disable core 0 in all CCX's and then disable core 1 in only two of them; it has to be symmetrical.

We might see some weird core counts if Zen 2 is using a 12-core die with 3 CCX's as a result of that (3 core, 6 core, 9 core, 12 core, etc), though more recent rumors say there'll be a 4 CCX die as well..

 

[_Flare]

there is no clever solution in making a CCX more than 4 Cores, yet.
it whould hinder the advantages AMD has in the moment. Yields, Clocks, etc.

AMD could be holding back the best Dies wich make say 100-200MHz more in every situation.

 

[R0H1T]

10 cores is not possible. You would have to disable core 0 in all CCX's and then disable core 1 in only two of them; it has to be symmetrical.

We might see some weird core counts if Zen 2 is using a 12-core die with 3 CCX's as a result of that (3 core, 6 core, 9 core, 12 core, etc), though more recent rumors say there'll be a 4 CCX die as well..

You said so yourself, it has to be symmetrical, as per the info available right now. So there can be 2 or 4 CCX, very likely 6~8 cores per CCX for Zen 2/3 & thus the core count will go up further.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

I wouldn't. I would bet they just cannot maintain enough supply to launch the product.

i doubt that, but i wouldnt rule it out.

10 cores is not possible. You would have to disable core 0 in all CCX's and then disable core 1 in only two of them; it has to be symmetrical.

We might see some weird core counts if Zen 2 is using a 12-core die with 3 CCX's as a result of that (3 core, 6 core, 9 core, 12 core, etc), though more recent rumors say there'll be a 4 CCX die as well..

symmetrically no its not possible but AMD likes to pull frogs out of the hat.

 

[bubbleawsome]

No way it’s 10 core, and no way they’re putting it on TR4, those motherboards cost too much for mainstream acceptance.

My bet is highly binned 2700x. And I think they could release them now in limited amounts, but they’ll probably just wait for an Intel processor to launch at a price point and then try to beat it by segmenting their lineup more, lowering the 2700x price a little and releasing the 2800x at a slightly higher point.

 

[dj-electric]

atleast AMD is doing what intel isnt, giving us old architecture but more cores for the EE, in reality a 7980XE is a 6980XE and etc.. i hate intel for that crap.

Threadripper is the same micro arch as the Ryzen counterparts...

A point worth defending here - Skylake is not broadwell... The difference is more than vast between those two, especially when overclocking.

 

[xkm1948]

Most likely some cherry picked Zen+ that can get 4.4GHz during boost.

 

[xrror]

I'd guess any theroetical 4.5Ghz bin parts would be currently stockpiled for future ThreadRipper SKUs?

 

[Shamalamadingdong]

They could be highly cheery picked parts, maybe 4.5GHz maybe more. A core increase would mean an entirely different chip which is way more work than its worth for a single chip and as Threadripper isn't coming to 12nm (ttbomk) i don't see this being an option.

 

[the54thvoid]

Like others think, surely it's going to be 4Ghz base, 4.5GHz boost. Devils Canyon style.

 

[Patriot]

And 2019 brings us Zen 2, Rome (EPYC) Wonder if the desktop will be pcie 4 too...

 

[Gasaraki]

Come on Intel, 8-Core i7-8086K processor. My body is ready.

 

[Shamalamadingdong]

And 2019 brings us Zen 2, Rome (EPYC) Wonder if the desktop will be pcie 4 too...

Probably not. From what I can tell it's gonna be reserved for servers and consumer stuff will jump straight to PCI-E 5.0. I think we might see PCI-E 5.0 arrive with DDR5 as well. Will be a while longer though.

 

[Vya Domus]

There isn't much Intel can respond with in a timely fashion other that price cuts , which they almost never do.

And to be frank , the 2700X can carry it's own weight just fine against the 8700K.

 

[Patriot]

There isn't much Intel can respond with in a timely fashion other that price cuts , which they almost never do.

And to be frank , the 2700X can carry it's own weight just fine against the 8700K.

They have a coffelake 8c sitting in the wings... and so AMD hopefully has the counter.

 

[Vya Domus]

They have a coffelake 8c sitting in the wings

Haven't seen anything that would indicate that , not in the near future. Intel builds their chips differently than AMD , the 8700 is six core and that's it. If they really did have an 8 core they would have likely made the chip like that from the very beginning and then just disable cores. It's not cost effective , even for someone like Intel , to introduce an entirely new chip like this for what is a relatively niche market.