AMD CEO Lisa Su Says Ryzen 7000 Launch Availability to be Strong

[phanbuey]

I would definitely wait for X3D if I was updating. Launch prices are always high. But for this gen specifically you know there is a +30% fps chip around the corner.

 

[Space Lynx]

I would definitely wait for X3D if I was updating. Launch prices are always high. But for this gen specifically you know there is a +30% fps chip around the corner.

Depends how safe you feel that WW3 won't happen before it comes out. Time to toss the dice.

 

[Tropick]

So, how do you think the 6-core / 12-thread Ryzen 5 7600X fare against the much stronger 14-core / 20-thread Core i5-13500?

I thought the i5-13500 non-K was 10-core/16-thread? Could be wrong though, purported specs are constantly changing.

But honestly I think AMD and Intel are going to be spending most of their time trading blows this generation. If I had to guess (emphasis on guess) I would say the 13500 will win in multi-thread but lose by a slight margin in single core to the 7600X.

Once AMD releases the 3DV parts however I think all bets are off. Unless Intel has an ace up their sleeve it might end up being a bloodbath in the gaming space, with Intel taking the beating. We've seen how larger cache sizes accelerate game workloads with the 5800X3D and that was basically a prototype. That being said, I've heard Intel has been spending a lot of R&D optimizing their cache size, layout, and latency for RPL so they might be able to compete against the Vcache parts in some sense, but I wouldn't count on it.

In a nutshell, I'm not going to say anything with any kind of definitive confidence. I don't work at Intel or AMD and I don't have access to any insider information besides what's already been leaked. The one thing I am sure of though is that there's going to be strong competition this generation, with good showings from both team red and blue. Who will come out on top I think is going to heavily depend on what you're doing with the CPU and the strength of your cooling/power delivery (on both sides).

Again, it would be smart to wait for third-party benchmarks of the programs you'll be using most. Both AMD and Intel cherry pick their first-party benchmarks because they're companies who need to make money to survive. Of course they're both going to tout themselves as having "da best CPU :O" because they can pull an extra 3FPS or finish .27 seconds faster in an arbitrary benchmark. I guarantee when Intel releases RPL they're going to show a bunch of numbers that have them stomping all over Zen 4 the same way AMD had a bunch of numbers showing them stomping all over ADL. Then the Z43D parts will be released which will have numbers that stomp all over RPL, and then RPL S-skus will launch with numbers that stomp all over Z43D.

In my opinion the two companies are going to be taking part in a beautiful ballet of oneupsmanship for the foreseeable future and if people make their purchasing decision with their heart instead of their brain they're going to end up getting burned.

Aaaaaand exhale.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Pretty good considering it doesn't exist yet. Also AM5 will have multiple gens of CPUs on it,

Unless of course AMD does what they did with both the 300 and 400 series and tries to leave them out in the cold with regards to CPU BIOS updates (which was only reversed after sustained complaints from the community).

this socket is dead after raptor lake.

With intel you dont need to update every other year, you're good on performance for 5+. Plenty of people out there still game with 6th gen intel without issue.

 

[ZetZet]

I thought the i5-13500 non-K was 10-core/16-thread? Could be wrong though, purported specs are constantly changing.

But honestly I think AMD and Intel are going to be spending most of their time trading blows this generation. If I had to guess (emphasis on guess) I would say the 13500 will win in multi-thread but lose by a slight margin in single core to the 7600X.

But even if that's the case there is no way 13500 will be 299. It will be less and you will still be able to run it with DDR4 on a super budget motherboard. I feel like AM5 at low-mid end is just really bad for AMD right now, both with new motherboard prices and DDR5.

 

[ModEl4]

So, how can you call this launch?
1. Great;
2. So-so;
3. Epic fail?

Technology wise is great (good on general performance, but it has also AVX512, Gen5 M.2, perf/W advantage) price aftertaste so-so.
If it was $699/$499/$349/$269 it would be a more balanced decision imo based on what i think the competition will offer.
The main problem is the entry price point of the platform, 13400F will launch one Q after the K models, it doesn't seem AMD will have for a year at least a 13400F+DDR4 performance/price class (and below) Zen4 competitor at all, except old EOL Zen3 platform solutions, so not very exciting regarding mainstream market.

 

[Raendor]

Well, hopefully. I have my eyes on the i5 13500 if it really is going to be 6P+8E.

Looking at this baby as well as it seems to be the best in i5 from core clocks/count perspective. Those b boards with xmp are just plug and play with no tweaking required and tdp easy to set for your needs.

 

[Tropick]

But even if that's the case there is no way 13500 will be 299. It will be less and you will still be able to run it with DDR4 on a super budget motherboard. I feel like AM5 at low-mid end is just really bad for AMD right now, both with new motherboard prices and DDR5.

I'm thinking it'll probably launch at 249, enough to undercut AMD but still making a decent margin. Although if they end up being super confident in the performance they might launch it higher, but I think you're right in it beating the 7600X in price by a good chunk.

As for the DDR support, I think that's going to be a MAJOR sticking point for a lot of people. AMD very well may have shot themselves in the foot with budget builders by going Apple mode with the whole "DDR5 is the future and by future we mean it's your only option". I can understand them wanting to maximize platform performance, and for the higher end parts I think that's a smart move, but we're definitely in a transition period right now and they're probably going to lose a lot of the budget market. I'm on a 5600X and decided to go with DDR4-3600 to achieve clock parity with the IF for that sweet, sweet latency reduction. I was able to scoop up 32GB of it for about $135 and that was in 2021. The cheapest DDR5-6000 (AMD's recommendation for the same IF clock parity) kit I can find right now is 32GB going for $209.99, not a massive increase but 75 bucks extra is still pretty significant and way out of the range of any budget-conscious builder. AFAIK there aren't any 16GB DDR5-6000 kits available right now, at least at my local microcenter anyways.

I think AMD is pretty heavily targeting high-end builders with this launch, which is fine, enthusiast-tier FTW, I just think this move has pretty much guaranteed Intel taking the budget leadership position. Maybe they know something we don't, maybe DDR5 is about to drop in price making it more attractive for the average custom builder and B650/X670 boards won't be as expensive as we think but that has yet to be seen. It's definitely clear that AMD has realized the FX death-march is over, they've proven themselves, and feel comfortable charging premium prices again. I just hope they don't get drunk off their success like Intel did back in the early 2010s. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[GFitzpatrick47]

Well strong availability of higher priced CPUs with higher priced motherboards and RAM.

And Intel releasing new chips with a complete product range from budget to high-end, DDR4 support, etc. shortly afterwards.

I don't see there being a shortage, lol.

While Intel might have an advantage at the absolute lowest end (solely because AMD isn't currently releasing chips at those price nor performance points), that pricing advantage starts to disappear once you get to the 7600x level.

Regardless of your current usage, both AMD and Intel will require chipset upgrades this generation. Only "advantage" Intel has is that people can still use their DDR4 memory. However, we've yet to see how DDR4 is going affect (if at all) the performance of Raptor Lake CPUs. A rather significant delta between near-peak performance between DDR4 and DDR5 memory might nullify some of the performance advantages of the upgrade, essentially necessitating DDR5 memory anyways in order to warrant the uprade from 12th to 13th-gen Intel.

Further, the price difference between DDR4 and DDR5 has gone down dramatically. Right now, a decent 2x8gb set of DDR4 can be had for about $45-50. DDR5? Lowest price on PCPartPicker is showing $80, but decent DDR5-5200 can be found for right at $100. A $50 difference in cost when looking at a full platform/chipset upgrade regardless of company just isn't a financially significant amount

If a roughly $50 difference is breaking your budget, and is the determining factor between choosing Intel or AMD for your upgrade, I don't think that person (or anyone in that financial position) should be looking at a full chipset upgrade anyways. Also, if you're that far behind in terms of the product cycle that this upgrade is a must, save up the additional $50 or so dollars for the DDR5 and go with the platform that you know is going to give you the greatest longevity in most respects (which, both at this time and given historical precedent, points to AMD).

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Still going to have to wait 6-8 months for prices to settle down to reasonable amounts.

 

[GFitzpatrick47]

I'm thinking it'll probably launch at 249, enough to undercut AMD but still making a decent margin. Although if they end up being super confident in the performance they might launch it higher, but I think you're right in it beating the 7600X in price by a good chunk.

As for the DDR support, I think that's going to be a MAJOR sticking point for a lot of people. AMD very well may have shot themselves in the foot with budget builders by going Apple mode with the whole "DDR5 is the future and by future we mean it's your only option". I can understand them wanting to maximize platform performance, and for the higher end parts I think that's a smart move, but we're definitely in a transition period right now and they're probably going to lose a lot of the budget market. I'm on a 5600X and decided to go with DDR4-3600 to achieve clock parity with the IF for that sweet, sweet latency reduction. I was able to scoop up 32GB of it for about $135 and that was in 2021. The cheapest DDR5-6000 (AMD's recommendation for the same IF clock parity) kit I can find right now is 32GB going for $209.99, not a massive increase but 75 bucks extra is still pretty significant and way out of the range of any budget-conscious builder. AFAIK there aren't any 16GB DDR5-6000 kits available right now, at least at my local microcenter anyways.

I think AMD is pretty heavily targeting high-end builders with this launch, which is fine, enthusiast-tier FTW, I just think this move has pretty much guaranteed Intel taking the budget leadership position. Maybe they know something we don't, maybe DDR5 is about to drop in price making it more attractive for the average custom builder and B650/X670 boards won't be as expensive as we think but that has yet to be seen. It's definitely clear that AMD has realized the FX death-march is over, they've proven themselves, and feel comfortable charging premium prices again. I just hope they don't get drunk off their success like Intel did back in the early 2010s. We'll have to wait and see.

To your point about AMD's recommendation when it comes to the DDR5: who says you have to listen it? You can

As I said above, anyone who is looking at a full platform upgrade, but is balking at a potential $50-75 dollar difference in upgrade costs, shouldn't be upgrading in the first place.

In your case, you're on the latest release from AMD. Upgrading for you, assuming you have the same use-cases for your system, doesn't make much sense either performance-wise or price-wise, unless you simply wanted the latest shit, in which case, that $75 shouldn't matter since you almost always pay more to be a first or early-adopter. For someone on an older CPU (1st or 2nd-gen Ryzen), or older platform entirely (pre-Ryzen or older Intels), the performance uplift would be so massive, that $75 dollar difference should've been considered (and budgeted for) long-before any thoughts of an upgrade crawled into their heads.

While someone upgrading might want the latest and greatest (and might not want to upgrade to a dead-end platform), there's still nothing stopping a person in the latter of the above categories (someone on pre-Ryzen or older Intels) from getting into an AM4 platform if they truly need an upgrade but don't have the immediate funds for AM5 (or Raptor Lake, for that matter). They're still plenty fast, they're still plenty efficient, and you'll still see plenty of availability of both motherboards and CPUs (as well as good DDR4 memory) as the years go on.

Lastly, I think it's still a bit odd that people are so certain that the lower-end Raptor Lake CPUs are going to be these price-performance world-beaters. It's quite possible that the platform benefits provided by Raptor Lake scale heavily the higher you go up the product stack.

 

[Bomby569]

shit manufacturers say

Hi,
Still going to have to wait 6-8 months for prices to settle down to reasonable amounts.

i think it depends more on Intel. The pricing is unresonable considering the cpu hike in price, plus new more expensive mobos and ddr5 6000

 

[Aretak]

I wish them a strong demand and even stronger availability.

Also, I wish for all of us that lower tire zen4 will be available in even larger availability BEFORE intel swing hard on the mid-low market, as happened with gen12.

If they can't than zen4, no matter how good it will be, will not cash in it's potential.

For all the fantastical hype from Intel fanboys about how Alder Lake was going to eat AMD's lunch due to the mid-low market, the top five best-selling CPUs on Amazon right this second are all Zen 3 parts (the 5800X, 5600X, 5800X3D, 5900X and 5600G in that order). Intel only have three chips in the top ten and the supposed value king 12400F isn't one of them. Mindfactory's data dumps continue to show AMD dominating sales on their site too. Mercury Research's quarterly reports have shown that AMD gained CPU market share from Intel in both quarters so far this year.

When did this supposed "swing hard" towards Intel 12th gen happen? Because none of the actual sales data seems to reflect that.

 

[aciDev]

AFAIK there aren't any 16GB DDR5-6000 kits available right now

KF560C40BBK2-16 or KF560C40BBAK2-16 for the much needed RGB

 

[Wirko]

I'm thinking it'll probably launch at 249, enough to undercut AMD but still making a decent margin. Although if they end up being super confident in the performance they might launch it higher, but I think you're right in it beating the 7600X in price by a good chunk.

As for the DDR support, I think that's going to be a MAJOR sticking point for a lot of people. AMD very well may have shot themselves in the foot with budget builders by going Apple mode with the whole "DDR5 is the future and by future we mean it's your only option". I can understand them wanting to maximize platform performance, and for the higher end parts I think that's a smart move, but we're definitely in a transition period right now and they're probably going to lose a lot of the budget market. I'm on a 5600X and decided to go with DDR4-3600 to achieve clock parity with the IF for that sweet, sweet latency reduction. I was able to scoop up 32GB of it for about $135 and that was in 2021. The cheapest DDR5-6000 (AMD's recommendation for the same IF clock parity) kit I can find right now is 32GB going for $209.99, not a massive increase but 75 bucks extra is still pretty significant and way out of the range of any budget-conscious builder. AFAIK there aren't any 16GB DDR5-6000 kits available right now, at least at my local microcenter anyways.

I think AMD is pretty heavily targeting high-end builders with this launch, which is fine, enthusiast-tier FTW, I just think this move has pretty much guaranteed Intel taking the budget leadership position. Maybe they know something we don't, maybe DDR5 is about to drop in price making it more attractive for the average custom builder and B650/X670 boards won't be as expensive as we think but that has yet to be seen. It's definitely clear that AMD has realized the FX death-march is over, they've proven themselves, and feel comfortable charging premium prices again. I just hope they don't get drunk off their success like Intel did back in the early 2010s. We'll have to wait and see.

You can't enter the budget market with only a costly, two-chiplet solution at your disposal. But you can do it with a monolithic chip. If history is any indication, APUs will come to notebooks in 2 months, to OEM desktops in 5 months, and to retail in 9 months from now, meaning June 2023, with a 4-core model conspicuously missing.

However, I think we'll see desktop APUs earlier this time around because AMD has more money than ever to buy TSMC's fab capacity in advance. That's unless Epyc and Instinct sales explode at a faster rate than anybody could expect, forcing (ahem) AMD to give priority to that part of the market over everything else.

For all the fantastical hype from Intel fanboys about how Alder Lake was going to eat AMD's lunch due to the mid-low market, the top five best-selling CPUs on Amazon right this second are all Zen 3 parts (the 5800X, 5600X, 5800X3D, 5900X and 5600G in that order). Intel only have three chips in the top ten and the supposed value king 12400F isn't one of them. Mindfactory's data dumps continue to show AMD dominating sales on their site too. Mercury Research's quarterly reports have shown that AMD gained CPU market share from Intel in both quarters so far this year.

Sales of CPUs as separate components are a drop in the bucket. OEM machines is where the majority of the sales is. It's a battle between the 5650GE, 5600G, 5300G, 4650G against 10400, 10400T, 10500T, 11400T and the like. Mercury's data is relevant here, and AMD seems to compete quite well.

 

[RandallFlagg]

OR : "Lisa Su says Ryzen 7000 launch availability will be non existent"

Serious question, does that ever happen?

Let's be real. They will sell out initial stock in the first week. It'll be 6 weeks before you get 2nd dibs.

This is the happy path scenario. It's like that with Intel too. Don't get mad unless it takes more than 6 weeks.

 

[evernessince]

OR : "Lisa Su says Ryzen 7000 launch availability will be non existent"

Serious question, does that ever happen?

Let's be real. They will sell out initial stock in the first week. It'll be 6 weeks before you get 2nd dibs.

This is the happy path scenario. It's like that with Intel too. Don't get mad unless it takes more than 6 weeks.

Given that the 5800X was available throughout the initial launch and for the months after, I doubt that there is going to be a 6 week period where you will not be able to obtain a Zen 4 CPU at all.

Considering economic factors like the global recession and electronic demand slump post pandemic everything points to there being less demand than usual.

Last, factor in the requirement for an entire platform upgrade which will further stymie demand.

For me this reveal was only so-so. Clearly AMD is proceeding with a strategy designed to extract maximum profits from customers. Even if performance is as good as claimed, you are paying a high price. The 3D chips being released a few months after launch is clearly a page taken out of Nvidia's book on milking high end products. Releasing only certain SKUs and chipsets, the pricing of the 7700X, and lack of non-x SKUs or a 7800X all too are marketing tactics to increase revenue. AMD is trying harder to upsell people this gen to the 7900X by launching with the 7700X instead of the 7800X.

I'm going to be honest, I hope AMD has poor sales because I hate this approach to product launches. Ditto goes for Nvidia as well, who will almost certainly apply the same concepts.

 

[FaintCarpet]

Well strong availability of higher priced CPUs with higher priced motherboards and RAM.

And Intel releasing new chips with a complete product range from budget to high-end, DDR4 support, etc. shortly afterwards.

I don't see there being a shortage, lol.

I totally agree here. The expensive total platform cost might not be worth it for some. As long as Intel is faster/competitive, AMD might have a harder time selling some of these chips.

We all will need to wait for third party benchmarks and actual prices upon release to be sure.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Well I disagree with you guys on it being available, even if they have a lot of supply on AMDs side the retailers simply don't have enough space nor are willing to put up front the capital to feed the initial demand on these launches. It's not a dig on AMD or Intel, anything like this that is a hot ticket item just works like that even outside of PC space even if the supplier has the goods Retail won't hold that much of it when you have like 20M people trying to get the item.

Now I can be wrong, but if I am, be real worried about the economy. I don't think I have ever seen any new gen CPU launch with 'sufficient supply' for the first month in Retail, and my first DIY rig was a 80286.

 

[evernessince]

Well I disagree with you guys on it being available, even if they have a lot of supply on AMDs side the retailers simply don't have enough space nor are willing to put up front the capital to feed the initial demand on these launches. It's not a dig on AMD or Intel, anything like this that is a hot ticket item just works like that even outside of PC space even if the supplier has the goods Retail won't hold that much of it when you have like 20M people trying to get the item.

Now I can be wrong, but if I am, be real worried about the economy. I don't think I have ever seen any new gen CPU launch with 'sufficient supply' for the first month in Retail, and my first DIY rig was a 80286.

That's why drop-shipping and distributors exist. Often times when i order a brand new product off Amazon the product will come direct from the manufacturer or distributor. In that case the retailer isn't tying up any capital or inventory space.

 

[catulitechup]

Further, the price difference between DDR4 and DDR5 has gone down dramatically. Right now, a decent 2x8gb set of DDR4 can be had for about $45-50. DDR5? Lowest price on PCPartPicker is showing $80, but decent DDR5-5200 can be found for right at $100. A $50 difference in cost when looking at a full platform/chipset upgrade regardless of company just isn't a financially significant amount

If a roughly $50 difference is breaking your budget, and is the determining factor between choosing Intel or AMD for your upgrade, I don't think that person (or anyone in that financial position) should be looking at a full chipset upgrade anyways. Also, if you're that far behind in terms of the product cycle that this upgrade is a must, save up the additional $50 or so dollars for the DDR5 and go with the platform that you know is going to give you the greatest longevity in most respects (which, both at this time and given historical precedent, points to AMD).

DDR5 performance and price compared DDR4, back to think DDR5 are shit in actual state (performance gains are lower and only appear in specific cases)

Maybe when high speed kits stay in lower prices for example 32gb 6400mhz (7200mhz personally consider as minimum) dual channel kit between 90 to 100us maybe can think again but maybe 100us in ram is so much (i dont need 32gb and many users dont needed too)

32gb only kits in high speed use same pity excuse of memory manufacturers (failing in show 32gb are necessary for more people ), give me more money and give you more ram but if dont need more, why must be give you more money

Personally think DDR5 need much time for offer better products with better price, maybe in somewhere 2024

 

[RandallFlagg]

That's why drop-shipping and distributors exist. Often times when i order a brand new product off Amazon the product will come direct from the manufacturer or distributor. In that case the retailer isn't tying up any capital or inventory space.

We'll see. Again I haven't seen it work like that. Intel made plenty of Gen 10 CPUs, but they sold out in 2020.

 

[Tomorrow]

you'll still be waiting months for the cheap motherboards to surface (and since Raptor Lake can use the whole lineup, its going to be harder to justify that wait for cheap AM5)

It's literally under two weeks. 27th September > 10th October for B650 boards.
RL will only launch with 3 K-SKU's on 20th October and the rest will follow in March 2023 - nearly half a year later.

 

[1d10t]

Might be in minority, but I never considered RPL-S or AM5 in particular was meant for "budget". Anything above Ryzen 5 3600X and i5-10400F already delivers comfortable 144fps at 1080p, wayyy above budget conscious 1080p60. You can't be wrong choosing either chips because there's are still an upgrade path.

 

[Dirt Chip]

For all the fantastical hype from Intel fanboys about how Alder Lake was going to eat AMD's lunch due to the mid-low market, the top five best-selling CPUs on Amazon right this second are all Zen 3 parts (the 5800X, 5600X, 5800X3D, 5900X and 5600G in that order). Intel only have three chips in the top ten and the supposed value king 12400F isn't one of them. Mindfactory's data dumps continue to show AMD dominating sales on their site too. Mercury Research's quarterly reports have shown that AMD gained CPU market share from Intel in both quarters so far this year.

When did this supposed "swing hard" towards Intel 12th gen happen? Because none of the actual sales data seems to reflect that.

AMD took about a year to relese more affordeble zen3 cpu.
Intel took a few month.
AMD is on a new AM5, you cant use othe zen on it beside zen4.

From that stand point, if AMD will not introduce mid and low tire cpus to AM5 then, if history repet itself, intel will be the only choice for new build if one is looking to get the newest tech.

Most of the sels are from min and low tires, despite Amazon to sells chart.