Possible AMD Ryzen PRO 4000G Series SEP Prices Surface, Incompatible with 400-series Chipset

[btarunr]

AMD's recent announcement of its Ryzen 4000G and Ryzen PRO 4000G series desktop processors lacked a key detail - pricing, possibly because it's irrelevant to end users as the processors are sold only in the OEM channel. momomo_us secured a slide (possibly by AMD's channel marketing), which puts out SEP (suggestive) pricing per chip in n-unit tray quantities. Apparently, the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G, and its energy-efficient -GE variant, are priced at USD $309. The Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G/GE comes with a $209 price, and the Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G/GE at $149.

Prices of the other parts in this slide appear to be stuck at their respective launch-time SEP pricing, since all of the price-cuts AMD implemented appear to be unofficial, and specific to retailers and regions. AMD also updated its familiar-looking processor-to-chipset compatibility slide with the inclusion of the new 4000G series. Apparently the new processors only work with AMD 500-series chipsets, such as the B550, X570, and the commercial-segment exclusive PRO565 chipset. This is strange since "Renoir" is now confirmed to lack PCIe gen 4.0, and only spares gen 3.0 x8 for PEG, which means 400-series chipsets are excluded due to ROM size limitations to squeeze in AGESA microcode supporting several generations of processors and microarchitectures. Interestingly, AMD assured customers of Ryzen 4000-series compatibility with 400-series chipsets. Perhaps they were only referring to the "Zen 3" based "Vermeer" processors, as the slide shows.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[HD64G]

Beta UEFIs will become available as will for the Zen3 CPUs.

 

[Tomorrow]

I can confirrm the $309 price. I should have 4750G in a few days. Bought it from a local retailer in EU for 309€.
Since i have X570 with the latest (stable) BIOS that specificly states support for new CPU's with Radeon Vega Graphics it should work.

 

[RAINFIRE333]

The whole Zen+, Zen 2, Zen 3, Ryzen 2000, 3000 and 4000 naming scheme is stupid. Add the B450, B550, X470 and X570 along with Ryzen 3, 5, 7 and 9 speed points and I even confuse myself typing this paragraph. They have equaled Intel in their naming stupidity on the speed/cpu count naming price points.

IMHO, if they were decent human beings, Zen+ should have been Zen 2 and so on to match their CPU prefix number naming which would have made Zen 3 = Ryzen 3000 CPU's, BUT NO! The mobile variants just released (Zen 2 I believe) would be Ryzen 3000 series instead of the 4000 series? This whole naming scheme is making me dizzy and sick.

 

[Dredi]

The whole Zen+, Zen 2, Zen 3, Ryzen 2000, 3000 and 4000 naming scheme is stupid. Add the B450, B550, X470 and X570 along with Ryzen 3, 5, 7 and 9 speed points and I even confuse myself typing this paragraph. They have equaled Intel in their naming stupidity on the speed/cpu count naming price points.

IMHO, if they were decent human beings, Zen+ should have been Zen 2 and so on to match their CPU prefix number naming which would have made Zen 3 = Ryzen 3000 CPU's, BUT NO! The mobile variants just released (Zen 2 I believe) would be Ryzen 3000 series instead of the 4000 series? This whole naming scheme is making me dizzy and sick.

It’s still a long way from intel IMO. They have the same arcitecture in four processor series. Equally idiotic naming would be if zen (no +, 2 or 3, just zen) architecture products would be named ryzen 4000.

 

[watzupken]

I think this is where AMD is in a mess. They promise users that 4xx series chipsets will get Zen 3 support, but strangely, this Zen 2 based APU will not be supported. I know some people will not like it (and honestly you can't please everyone), but I feel AMD should have stood by their decision to limit all Ryzen 4xxx and 4xxxG to the newer 5xx chipsets. The user experience of having to flash BIOs after BIOs to upgrade or get a stable BIOs is not great to be honest. For some, it may have been a straight forward process, but I am not sure all have a smooth sailing experience like me.

The whole Zen+, Zen 2, Zen 3, Ryzen 2000, 3000 and 4000 naming scheme is stupid. Add the B450, B550, X470 and X570 along with Ryzen 3, 5, 7 and 9 speed points and I even confuse myself typing this paragraph. They have equaled Intel in their naming stupidity on the speed/cpu count naming price points.

IMHO, if they were decent human beings, Zen+ should have been Zen 2 and so on to match their CPU prefix number naming which would have made Zen 3 = Ryzen 3000 CPU's, BUT NO! The mobile variants just released (Zen 2 I believe) would be Ryzen 3000 series instead of the 4000 series? This whole naming scheme is making me dizzy and sick.

I feel there is nothing wrong with the general naming convention. For example, Zen and Zen+ are effectively the same architecture, just some slight tweaks to the Zen+. Because it is release in 2 different years, Ryzen 1xxx and 2xxx sounds appropriate to me.

The only confusing part will be the APU which is always 1 generation slower in terms of architecture, but yet having the same model number as the newer CPUs (no iGPU). I feel AMD made the decision to give it this confusing naming convention because if they name it as Ryzen 7 3700G (instead of Ryzen 7 4700G), it would seem like an older model. It is partially correct to say that it is based on an older CPU architecture, but I cannot deny that it is a new product because it is not 100% the same as the chiplet design on the older Ryzen 3xxx series.

 

[tygrus]

Yes, they started jumping ahead with the Zen1 based 2400G arriving before Zen1+ based Ryzen 2000 CPU only models (non-APU). Now they have to stick with the silly idea because the marketing department says so.
If the new APU's can save me $250AUD not buying GPU for office/audio/image/stream/etc/noGames then it still sounds good to me. Based on previous experience, it's going to be a long wait (ie. about 12 months) before the Zen3 based APU's arrive to the desktop.

 

[Frode Bergeton Nilsen]

This is strange since "Renoir" is now confirmed to lack PCIe gen 4.0, and only spares gen 3.0 x8 for PEG, which means 400-series chipsets are excluded due to ROM size limitations to squeeze in AGESA microcode supporting several generations of processors and microarchitectures.

OEMs would use the cheapest possible chipset. Like the upcoming A520. Why would an OEM use low numbered chipsets? Rather than new ones, with a ton less headaches? The new ones, as in A520, are only supposed to support the 4000 series, but will support it.

This is what an OEM would want.

Also, pushing these chips on OEMs, they can claim to offer 4000 series CPUs with brand new chipsets. Which is exactly what they want. And if the DIY market have no 4000 series, the more the bait for them.

 

[Tomorrow]

Actually the 4000G series has 16 lanes to the GPU not 8 like 3000G series. Robert Hallock (technical marketing lead) confirmed this on twitter and i can confirm this based on my 4750G testing.

 

[Frode Bergeton Nilsen]

Actually the 4000G series has 16 lanes to the GPU not 8 like 3000G series. Robert Hallock (technical marketing lead) confirmed this on twitter and i can confirm this based on my 4750G testing.

I actually missed that he still thinks this a 8 lane solution. Asrock among others has stated for weeks, on their MB pages, that these chips will offer 16 lanes. They got one statement about zen2, and another for these chips, on how the lanes are handled. This has been publicly confirmed for weeks now.

 

[Baum]

Its funny how rom size for cpu compatability in the year 2020 can hold back some of the board makers...

if i give my customers "usb stick" flash posibility, like on boot hold clear cmos while on one specific port is an usb fat32 drive with ./update/bios.bin

Then i could do a specific bios file for every 'series' of cpu and have enought space for the rest modules, or support strange models by cutting features.. No Software Raid with CPU XYZ model..

but no sell the customer new boards ;-(