AMD Wanting to Time Launch of AM5 Platform with DDR5 Availability

[Chrispy_]

If AMD only support DDR5, then I'm out. DDR5 is expensive and largely crap.

AMD will only support DDR5.

They know DDR5 is currently expensive and crap which is why they're waiting until it's cheap and not crap.

 

[bug]

They know DDR5 is currently expensive and crap which is why they're waiting until it's cheap and not crap.

Not really. They'll just sell their server parts until they can get enough 5nm fab capacity, at which point they will declare DDR5 is cheap and not crap. Even if by then a 16GB kit will only have dropped in price like $10.
No way they can wait until DDR5 migrates to reasonable territory, that won't happen for at least another year or two, Zen4 can't wait that long.

 

[R0H1T]

What are your sources for this?

Sources for what exactly? Apple has the highest capacity booked & used for 5nm, Intel's also going to use it IIRC for their GPU's so AMD, even with everything they have, is probably a distant third or fourth with Nvidia topping of the rest.

 

[ratirt]

Not really. They'll just sell their server parts until they can get enough 5nm fab capacity, at which point they will declare DDR5 is cheap and not crap. Even if by then a 16GB kit will only have dropped in price like $10.
No way they can wait until DDR5 migrates to reasonable territory, that won't happen for at least another year or two, Zen4 can't wait that long.

From what has been said, The capacity from TSMC has been already secured. So I don't think that matters. Not to mention, every company had to pay upfront for the capacity security.
AMD will not wait long that is for sure. Delay a bit, probably but that is it. Either way the DDR5 will get cheaper I hope.
I checked some sites for DDR5. You can actually buy it but the prices are a bit high to be fair. Especially if you compare these to DDR4 but, is it that much of a surprise?
AMD has the Infinity Fabric and this one is tied to memory frequency. I think AMD would want to move to a higher frequency modules and clearly DDR4 is reaching limits so DDR5 is the way to go.
We don't have all information about this but it would seem AMD want's to move forward with this. Not to mention, putting another controller for DDR4 is also a cost. Sooner or later the DDR4 will be a niche in the market and AMD just doesn't want to bump their cost with support for DDR4 with Zen4. I get the approach.
What are the speeds for DDR5 and DDR4 to be on par or close in performance nowadays? Does anyone know?

 

[stimpy88]

AMD is in a bit of trouble here. They tied Zen 4/AM5 to DDR5, assuming Intel had done the same with ADL and would be subject to the same constraints, and were then blindsided by Intel launching ADL with combined DDR4 and DDR5 support. So now Intel is ahead in terms of product launch, it's much cheaper to upgrade to ADL than it will be to go to Zen 4 because you can reuse your current RAM with the former, and ADL's aggressive pricing against AMD's extortionate pricing and lack of true low-end options is definitely going to swing a fair bit of marketshare back Intel's way before Zen 4 gets out of the gate. In short, AMD is staring down the prospect of half a year or more without any new product launches (no, the stupid 5800X3DOMGWTFLMAOOO doesn't count), against a competitor's refreshed and compelling product stack... not a good place to be in.

The problem IMO is Zen 4 being designed for AM5 and thus coupled to DDR5. When AM4 launched, DDR4 had already been on the market for 2 years, but DDR5 will have had a year or less of market presence at the time that AMD hopes to launch Zen 4/AM5 - and that's before you take into account the DDR5 shortages and price hikes. To my mind it would've been a lot more logical to keep Zen 4 on AM4/DDR4 (which could have been released sooner, perhaps even preempting ADL), then release Zen 5/AM5 as a simple Zen 4 refresh with DDR5 support a year later.

Say what you like about Intel, they've definitely been a lot smarter about the DDR5 transition than AMD has. I'm honestly expecting Zen 4 to slip to 2023 at this point.


What are your sources for this?

This is exactly why I dont understand what they are doing with the 3D cache parts. That should have been a replacement of Zen3, so that people like me, who don't want to adopt DDR5, as it's a total waste of money, have a choice to spend their money on AM4 for another year while DDR5 matures, becomes more available and more performant. AMD have misread the room.

 

[bug]

This is exactly why I dont understand what they are doing with the 3D cache parts. That should have been a replacement of Zen3, so that people like me, who don't want to adopt DDR5, as it's a total waste of money, have a choice to spend their money on AM4 for another year while DDR5 matures, becomes more available and more performant. AMD have misread the room.

Probably too expensive to adopt across the board.

 

[stimpy88]

Probably too expensive to adopt across the board.

Versus slow uptake on AM5 parts? I don't believe that for a second. That chip probably cost $80-$100 tops to manufacture, then add a bit for AMDs R&D plus profit... They are making bank on that part, don't you worry.

 

[ratirt]

This is exactly why I dont understand what they are doing with the 3D cache parts. That should have been a replacement of Zen3, so that people like me, who don't want to adopt DDR5, as it's a total waste of money, have a choice to spend their money on AM4 for another year while DDR5 matures, becomes more available and more performant. AMD have misread the room.

Putting another memory controller is a cost. What's to understand. If you dont know what is it about, you know what is it about. Zen 3 with 3dCache is to extend the AM4 socket not Zen4.
It has been said by AMD, AM4 to last 5 years and it did. AMD is following the plan that has been put into place which means moving to AM5 with Zen4.

Versus slow uptake on AM5 parts?

AM5 is scheduled later this year. There is still time for AM5 and DDR5 to be in place.

 

[stimpy88]

Putting another memory controller is a cost. What's to understand. If you dont know what is it about, you know what is it about. Zen 3 with 3dCache is to extend the AM4 socket not Zen4.
It has been said by AMD, AM4 to last 5 years and it did. AMD is following the plan that has been put into place which means moving to AM5 with Zen4.


AM5 is scheduled later this year. There is still time for AM5 and DDR5 to be in place.

You're so not understanding the market. DDR5 is simply too expensive, and will be no different in 8 months time. Intel did not make DDR4 boards and parts because of charity. They read the room, they understood the challenges to drive mass adoption of DDR5.

And please stop talking like the people you are talking to have never opened up a computer before. I fully understand how this works. I see what AMD have done, and they have made a miscalculation, and ofcourse it's not as easy as spinning up a new part with a new memory controller, because that takes time and money. Their miscalculation took place 2 years ago.

 

[bug]

Versus slow uptake on AM5 parts? I don't believe that for a second. That chip probably cost $80-$100 tops to manufacture, then add a bit for AMDs R&D plus profit... They are making bank on that part, don't you worry.

But what sense would a 3D Cache 5600X make if it cost the same as a 5800X? You can just buy the 5800X right now and be done with it.

They're not stupid, you know. They've been caught off guard by the DDR5 pricing (and possibly 5nm capacity), but surprises happen to everyone making a mid or long term plan.

 

[stimpy88]

But what sense would a 3D Cache 5600X make if it cost the same as a 5800X? You can just buy the 5800X right now and be done with it.

They're not stupid, you know. They've been caught off guard by the DDR5 pricing (and possibly 5nm capacity), but surprises happen to everyone making a mid or long term plan.

They released a low-end gaming part, the one they have already announced, but should have followed up with a high end, 16 core version. So 2 SKUs. That would have been a good way of sending the AM4 platform off. While people that don't know, don't care about DDR5 and it's bad price/performance would still want the latest and greatest, and invest in the AM5 platform. Right now, AMD are at terrible risk of the supply constraints of DDR5 and it's pricing shutting down mass adoption of AM5, which is why there are rumours of AMD pushing the release date to early next year.

Zen 4 should speak for itself by offering the rumoured 15-25% IPC improvement, that's more than enough for most people adopting a new platform, as Intel has the same people used to meagre 3-5% IPC improvements while moving to a new platform! But if that's coupled with memory which costs as much or more than the CPU, you will have adoption issues, hence why Intel offers support for both memory architectures, and OEMs producing DDR4 to DDR5 memory adaptors.

 

[ratirt]

You're so not understanding the market. DDR5 is simply too expensive, and will be no different in 8 months time. Intel did not make DDR4 boards and parts because of charity. They read the room, they understood the challenges to drive mass adoption of DDR5.

Dude you don't understand anything not just the market. AMD has its plan, promises about new products and they have already secured capacity from TSMC for the Zen4 5nm. They can't just not do it especially if they also have been making promises to stakeholders. Did you expect the DDR5 is going to be cheap at launch? Obviously it would not be cheap. It is not about the price only, AMD is mostly concerned about the supply. There is always a challenge when you go for new tech. And you clearly dont understand it. How do you think the DDR5 memory modules are gonna get cheaper and broadly available? When people wont buy them but instead go for DDR4? Is that your idea for good market? If they wont be buying them there will be no point for making those because the companies making these, will lose a lot of cash making them when nobody buys it. They wont ramp up the capacity of the modules since nobody would want them. Maturity is another step but in order to get something matured it needs to be purchased and used so these can be tweaked over time. Then, ramp up the capacity due to demand and improve process for making those to get them produced cheaper. How do you want to achieve product maturity when this one is not in the market because people would just go for something else?
So no brother. You dont understand the market totally.

Zen 4 should speak for itself by offering the rumoured 15-25% IPC improvement, that's more than enough for most people adopting a new platform, as Intel has the same people used to meagre 3-5% IPC improvements while moving to a new platform! But if that's coupled with memory which costs as much or more than the CPU, you will have adoption issues, hence why Intel offers support for both memory architectures, and OEMs producing DDR4 to DDR5 memory adaptors.

Zen4 is not out yet what performance it will have we will see. Just because you think it should have 15-25% up doesnt mean it will have that much. That is just your expectations. People will buy the DDR5 even if it is expensive. You do pay for the top tier tech nonetheless and it has been shown over the history of new tech stuff releases every time something new showed up. The prices will drop eventually. Timing should be the best but AMD cant wait for the DDR5 to mature and drop in price to mach DDR4 because that would not happen this year. Maturity is for products available in the market and actually purchased not lying on the shelves because people want to go with cheaper stuff.
DDR4 has actually reached its limits in performance. DDR5 is just starting and it will get better over time if people buy it. When you buy a new platform with DDR5, it is not much better at the moment than DDR4 but it will be in time.

 

[stimpy88]

Dude you don't understand anything not just the market. AMD has its plan, promises about new products and they have already secured capacity from TSMC for the Zen4 5nm. They can't just not do it especially if they also have been making promises to stakeholders. Did you expect the DDR5 is going to be cheap at launch? Obviously it would not be cheap. It is not about the price only, AMD is mostly concerned about the supply. There is always a challenge when you go for new tech. And you clearly dont understand it. How do you think the DDR5 memory modules are gonna get cheaper and broadly available? When people wont buy them but instead go for DDR4? Is that your idea for good market? If they wont be buying them there will be no point for making those because the companies making these, will lose a lot of cash making them when nobody buys it. They wont ramp up the capacity of the modules since nobody would want them. Maturity is another step but in order to get something matured it needs to be purchased and used so these can be tweaked over time. Then, ramp up the capacity due to demand and improve process for making those to get them produced cheaper. How do you want to achieve product maturity when this one is not in the market because people would just go for something else?
So no brother. You dont understand the market totally.

Zen4 is not out yet what performance it will have we will see. Just because you think it should have 15-25% up doesnt mean it will have that much. That is just your expectations. People will buy the DDR5 even if it is expensive. You do pay for the top tier tech nonetheless and it has been shown over the history of new tech stuff releases every time something new showed up. The prices will drop eventually. Timing should be the best but AMD cant wait for the DDR5 to mature and drop in price to mach DDR4 because that would not happen this year. Maturity is for products available in the market and actually purchased not lying on the shelves because people want to go with cheaper stuff.
DDR4 has actually reached its limits in performance. DDR5 is just starting and it will get better over time if people buy it. When you buy a new platform with DDR5, it is not much better at the moment than DDR4 but it will be in time.

Aaaannd your doing it again. Please block me so I don't have to beat my head against a wall. You obviously know everything, and far better than anyone else. But I don't care to be lectured by you anymore.

 

[ratirt]

Aaaannd your doing it again. Please block me so I don't have to beat my head against a wall. You obviously know everything, and far better than anyone else. But I don't care to be lectured by you anymore.

Not everything. Oh so you want to lecture me but since it didnt work out you get mad?
If something is to mature withing time, it is not by lying on a shelve for a time being but it has to be used, and demand has to grow. Otherwise, it will end in a dumpster.
You clearly say AMD should stick to DDR4 and AM4 for Zen4 because the DDR4 is cheap. Now that is a stupid statement and you clearly talk only about you buying things cheaper since in your eyes that is what the market is all about.
Maybe you need to rephrase what you are trying to say cause it is not clear? I don't know. BTW. I'm not blocking anyone since that would have been disrespectful.

 

[bug]

Not everything. Oh so you want to lecture me but since it didnt work out you get mad?
If something is to mature withing time, it is not by lying on a shelve for a time being but it has to be used, and demand has to grow. Otherwise, it will end in a dumpster.
You clearly say AMD should stick to DDR4 and AM4 for Zen4 because the DDR4 is cheap. Now that is a stupid statement and you clearly talk only about you buying things cheaper since in your eyes that is what the market is all about.
Maybe you need to rephrase what you are trying to say cause it is not clear? I don't know. BTW. I'm not blocking anyone since that would have been disrespectful.

He's not saying AMD should stick with DDR4, he says AMD would have been better going the Intel route and offering both options.
You're taking anything said that's not a praise to AMD far too personally. (Fwiw I don't think it would have been wise for AMD to add DDR4 support to Zen4, but that's another story.)

 

[EatingDirt]

You're so not understanding the market. DDR5 is simply too expensive, and will be no different in 8 months time. Intel did not make DDR4 boards and parts because of charity. They read the room, they understood the challenges to drive mass adoption of DDR5.

And please stop talking like the people you are talking to have never opened up a computer before. I fully understand how this works. I see what AMD have done, and they have made a miscalculation, and ofcourse it's not as easy as spinning up a new part with a new memory controller, because that takes time and money. Their miscalculation took place 2 years ago.

What is "too expensive"? Yes, DDR5 will be more expensive than DDR4 in 9 months. It will be more expensive until companies start phasing out DDR4 production in favor of DDR5, just like we see with every other DDR transition, this will take years. That being said, DDR5 prices are currently inflated due to a chip shortage, you can see that by all the "out of stock" DDR5 chips that are of, let's say, somewhat reasonable price on newegg. They're currently roughly 2.5-2.75x the price of their equivalent DDR4 counterparts. Once chip shortages ease, which is supposed to be near the end of this year, I'd expect the price difference to be reduced even more.

On top of that, do you understand how long it takes to develop a CPU? You're acting like AMD could simply change the design at the last minute, predicting 2 years in advance for a very recent chip shortage. If not for the chip shortage, the change to a DDR5 only platform wouldn't be as poor of a value as it currently is, and by the end of the year it almost definitely won't be as bad of a value now. Luckily, AMD isn't bringing out AM5/Zen4 out right now, so the value of DDR5 right now is irrelevant.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Easy to solve.

AMD releases only higher end SKU first , priced high while am4 actually phases out of the channel 8months later 16 from now bring out more economical options.

Well that's what I think they'll do.

Because what's the point of ANY budget system having 2/300£ memory, none.

 

[kapone32]

This is why I like TPU. Fair and honest opinions on all sides of what AMD has planned and what the market will do.

 

[bug]

What is "too expensive"? Yes, DDR5 will be more expensive than DDR4 in 9 months. It will be more expensive until companies start phasing out DDR4 production in favor of DDR5, just like we see with every other DDR transition, this will take years. That being said, DDR5 prices are currently inflated due to a chip shortage, you can see that by all the "out of stock" DDR5 chips that are of, let's say, somewhat reasonable price on newegg. They're currently roughly 2.5-2.75x the price of their equivalent DDR4 counterparts. Once chip shortages ease, which is supposed to be near the end of this year, I'd expect the price difference to be reduced even more.

On top of that, do you understand how long it takes to develop a CPU? You're acting like AMD could simply change the design at the last minute, predicting 2 years in advance for a very recent chip shortage. If not for the chip shortage, the change to a DDR5 only platform wouldn't be as poor of a value as it currently is, and by the end of the year it almost definitely won't be as bad of a value now. Luckily, AMD isn't bringing out AM5/Zen4 out right now, so the value of DDR5 right now is irrelevant.

Replacing/upgrading the memory controller is not that hard, it's on a different chip. The reason I think AMD should not do that is that if they want to reuse AM5 for another 3-4 generations, they'd have to drag along DDR4 pins just as long. Intel doesn't have this problem, nobody expects LGA1700 to be good for more than a couple of generations.

This is why I like TPU. Fair and honest opinions on all sides of what AMD has planned and what the market will do.

Well, you don't need to be an oracle to know DDR5 will still cost an arm and a leg a year from now.
What's being said about AMD is speculation though. Educated guesses at best.

 

[ratirt]

He's not saying AMD should stick with DDR4, he says AMD would have been better going the Intel route and offering both options.
You're taking anything said that's not a praise to AMD far too personally. (Fwiw I don't think it would have been wise for AMD to add DDR4 support to Zen4, but that's another story.)

Praising because I disagree with or colleague here?
Why would AMD go Intel route in the first place? Because our colleague does not like the idea of DDR5 costing so much? He said I dont know the market and that was his argument towards what I said. but I'm praising AMD since I disagree with his statement?
I'm not praising AMD but since I do understand market, I can't say that AMD's approach not going for DDR4 and AM4 with Zen 4 is a wrong approach. I can't say it is a wrong approach for AMD not to include the DDR4 controller with Zen4. I think it is inevitable move forward. Putting DDR5 price above everything else that's been said previously, why AMD does this, and why they would rather delay release a bit instead of moving back to AM4 and DDR4 with Zen4 would have been a disaster for AMD. That's what I'm saying. What he is saying? DDR price is high AMD is better off with AM4 and DDR4.

 

[kapone32]

Easy to solve.

AMD releases only higher end SKU first , priced high while am4 actually phases out of the channel 8months later 16 from now bring out more economical options.

Well that's what I think they'll do.

Because what's the point of ANY budget system having 2/300£ memory, none.

I think AMD is in a really good position. The 5600G and 5700G are both very capable APUs (you can set the frame buffer to 16GB) and will keep the budget market happy for now (on the AMD side). If the 3D chip is 20% faster than a 5900X in Gaming, plenty of 2000, 3000 and 5000 series owners will buy that chip just for that. Anyone who has gone from Ryzen 1000 to 5000 understands the tangible performance upgrade you can have. Then there will be new GPUs to add to that as well. The best thing though is RDNA2 coming to APUs which will be absolutely EPIC for sales even though it uses LPDDR5 (which should have been secured a long ago for laptops anyway. When the new Zen4 chips are ready DDR5 should have stabilized in terms of supply (because of Laptop sales) but none of those variables are currently normal.

Imagine any emulator/tablet running a Zen APU with RDNA2 Graphics. Even Google Play apps work on Windows 11.

 

[Assimilator]

The 5600G and 5700G are both very capable APUs (you can set the frame buffer to 16GB) and will keep the budget market happy for now (on the AMD side).

AMD killed the budget CPU market back in Zen 1 days by releasing only mid- to high-end chips in quantity, the low-end chips were always late or unavailable or made significant tradeoffs. Zen 3 is no different - 5300G is the only true budget CPU with iGPU and is available to OEMs only, 5600G/5700G are mid-range parts that make no sense in a world where 5600X exists, performs better, and is often cheaper (not to mention that 5600X is not artificially limited to PCIe 3.0).

Intel's just-released i3-12100 generally beats all 3000-series AMD CPUs (even the 3900X) in most benchmarks, and is close on the heels of the 5600X while being less than half the MSRP; has an iGPU; and PCIe 5.0 support. It is going to utterly dominate the budget market, because the budget market has no loyalty to a specific manufacturer, the budget market will buy whatever performs well for the least amount of money, and until Zen 4 arrives that is going to be Intel - especially since you can reuse the DDR4 from your current AMD system.

AMD has been giving the middle finger to the low-/mid-end CPU market since Zen 1 - entirely due to greed - and Intel is now, deservedly, going to sweep that segment and regain a huge amount of marketshare.

 

[EatingDirt]

AMD killed the budget CPU market back in Zen 1 days by releasing only mid- to high-end chips in quantity, the low-end chips were always late or unavailable or made significant tradeoffs. Zen 3 is no different - 5300G is the only true budget CPU with iGPU and is available to OEMs only, 5600G/5700G are mid-range parts that make no sense in a world where 5600X exists, performs better, and is often cheaper (not to mention that 5600X is not artificially limited to PCIe 3.0).

Intel's just-released i3-12100 beats even the 5600X in most benchmarks, is less than half the MSRP, has an iGPU, and PCIe 5.0 support. It is going to utterly dominate the budget market, because the budget market has no loyalty to a specific manufacturer, the budget market will buy whatever performs well for the least amount of money, and until Zen 4 arrives that is going to be Intel - especially since you can reuse the DDR4 from your current AMD system.

AMD has been giving the middle finger to the low-/mid-end CPU market since Zen 1 - entirely due to greed - and Intel is now, deservedly, going to sweep that segment and regain a huge amount of marketshare.

You must have a short memory, but when Zen 3 released, you could barely find a single Zen 3 CPU for the 4-6 months. 5900x's have gone out of stock on amazon as recently as early December, and 5600x's as recently as October. They didn't go into the low-end market simply because they don't have the capacity in the foundries, so naturally they focused on the higher margin products.

 

[bug]

AMD killed the budget CPU market back in Zen 1 days by releasing only mid- to high-end chips in quantity, the low-end chips were always late or unavailable or made significant tradeoffs. Zen 3 is no different - 5300G is the only true budget CPU with iGPU and is available to OEMs only, 5600G/5700G are mid-range parts that make no sense in a world where 5600X exists, performs better, and is often cheaper (not to mention that 5600X is not artificially limited to PCIe 3.0).

Intel's just-released i3-12100 beats even the 5600X in most benchmarks, is less than half the MSRP, has an iGPU, and PCIe 5.0 support. It is going to utterly dominate the budget market, because the budget market has no loyalty to a specific manufacturer, the budget market will buy whatever performs well for the least amount of money, and until Zen 4 arrives that is going to be Intel - especially since you can reuse the DDR4 from your current AMD system.

AMD has been giving the middle finger to the low-/mid-end CPU market since Zen 1 - entirely due to greed - and Intel is now, deservedly, going to sweep that segment and regain a huge amount of marketshare.

Agreed on everything but the last part. There's a supply shortage going on, focusing on higher margin SKUs is common sense, not greed.
(I know the current shortage started way after Zen, but everything since Zen has been built on cutting edge nodes, so it was supply constrained anyway.)

 

[kapone32]

AMD killed the budget CPU market back in Zen 1 days by releasing only mid- to high-end chips in quantity, the low-end chips were always late or unavailable or made significant tradeoffs. Zen 3 is no different - 5300G is the only true budget CPU with iGPU and is available to OEMs only, 5600G/5700G are mid-range parts that make no sense in a world where 5600X exists, performs better, and is often cheaper (not to mention that 5600X is not artificially limited to PCIe 3.0).

Intel's just-released i3-12100 beats even the 5600X in most benchmarks, is less than half the MSRP, has an iGPU, and PCIe 5.0 support. It is going to utterly dominate the budget market, because the budget market has no loyalty to a specific manufacturer, the budget market will buy whatever performs well for the least amount of money, and until Zen 4 arrives that is going to be Intel - especially since you can reuse the DDR4 from your current AMD system.

AMD has been giving the middle finger to the low-/mid-end CPU market since Zen 1 - entirely due to greed - and Intel is now, deservedly, going to sweep that segment and regain a huge amount of marketshare.

I see from this post (and others) that you are not living in the real world. The 5300G in 2022? If you want to blame anyone blame Team Green for killing the budget market. You do realize that you qualified the 12100 referencing that it supports DDR5 which is in no way budget. The 5600X is a great CPU but has no IGPU. The 5600G is great but you missed the reason. As i said before you can set the Frame buffer to 16GB of DDR4 directly into the APU. You also forgot that I mentioned that RDNA2 is coming to the APUs. Regardless of how you may feel Intel cannot hold a candle to AMD if they drop RDNA2 (They can barely keep up to Vega). That budget crowd you are talking about will sing all day with their 1080P Laptop with no DGPU but FSR, 24 hour battery life and whatever other software improvements AMD are (purportedly) working on. It would seem that a lot of people are trying to pigeon hole AMD into Intel's way of Corporate life. AMD is not looking at maximizing profits but they also do not need the "budget" moniker attached to their processors especially if they are high performing. When is the last time you saw an Intel exec on PCworld's livestream? Are you really going to bring up the exhaustive argument of (percieved loss of performance) running PCIE 3.0 on a GPU that is connected driectly to the CPU, Memory Controller and Power delivery right on the Chip? Before you wax on though think about this a 5800X is 70 to 80% higher in performance vs a 1800X. Intel only needed one generation to achieve that but 11th Gen was more of the same and they got smacked for it so they give us 12th Gen that is secretly a power hog with main stream boards that rival HEDT MBs in VRM design and capability. I have a 5950X and am loving it but my 5600G using 16GB of Frame Buffer gives me a consistent 100 FPS in Sleeping Dogs (Not the Definitive edition) at 1080P medium and I love that too. I ask you in a world where a budget GPU is $600 Canadian vs $399 for the top end just a few years ago. How the 5600G at 349 and 5700G at 399 are mid range. I bet you the 5600G is already 80 to 100% faster than a 3400G.

The last point I will make is take a 5600G and a 12100 yourself and Game with the IGPU and then tell me which is better in terms of software support and features,