Ryzen 3000 listed online early on russian site.

[cdawall]

Zen2 could be barely better than Zen+, doesn't matter, what matters now is Intel answer to being attacked on all fronts.
It's unbelievable that AMD got to 7/10nm before Intel, after "surviving" with FX for so long. I think it's a combination of good innovation from Zen and lazy complacency from Intel.

Isn't amds 7nm comparable in size to intels 10nm?

 

[lexluthermiester]

Wish they never acquired ATI in the first place.

It's interesting to think about. Maybe things might have been better, maybe not, but let's stay on topic.

 

[moproblems99]

My point there about clockspeeds wasn't to put intel in a more positive light

I wasn't trying to imply Intel favoritism and I can see why you may have thought that with the general feel and tone of the forums for the last few months. I was more implying that we are reaching the clock limits, without going exotic, and those may not be jumping so much. We may need to get used the wider is better mantra.

Edit

what matters now is Intel answer to being attacked on all fronts.

I don't think that matters at all. They have proven themselves to be arrogant and stubborn like Apple. They are going to pay the price for a few more years until Keller's next design comes out for them. At which point, he will be hired by AMD and we'll do this again.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Isn't amds 7nm comparable in size to intels 10nm?

Certainly is but they're not running at the same capacity or yeild and it's those that have made the difference, execution.
This certainly would all be different if Intel had hit their milestones ,Amd would have a inferior performer by far , just with loads more cores.

 

[EarthDog]

I wasn't trying to imply Intel favoritism and I can see why you may have thought that with the general feel and tone of the forums for the last few months. I was more implying that we are reaching the clock limits, without going exotic, and those may not be jumping so much. We may need to get used the wider is better mantra.

3770k - 3.5/3.9 ghz
4790k - 4/4.4 ghz
6700k - 4/4.2 ghz
7700k - 4.2/4.5 ghz
8700k (6c/12t) - 3.7/4.7 ghz (4.3 ghz turbo 6c)
9900k (8c/16t) - 3.6/5 ghz (4.7 turbo 8c)

 

[GoldenX]

It's interesting to think about. Maybe things might have been better, maybe not, but let's stay on topic.

Mmm, Zen with Turing IGP... RT and Tensor cores on CPUs...
We chose the wrong timeline.

On topic, I don't think Intel is near the clock limit, they are first of all in the thermal limit of 14#nm (that's 4 + together).

 

[Super XP]

I believe Solaris17 makes a great point. More CPU cores equals a push for all dev's to fully concentrate on multi-cores.
More cores? Bring it on, I am all for it.

 

[eidairaman1]

If AMD fixes what was associated with TR 1000/2000 Series in 3000 I may finally make this 5.0 FX8350 second fiddle.

Same with the Navi+, make this 290 VaporX my back up card.

Im staying optimistic but without jumping the gun.

Till we have Ryzen 3200-3800X and Threadripper 3920-3990WX in hand everything is in speculation.

 

[The Lighthouse]

People at Korean hardware forums/site are saying now distributors just got "sample for third generation Ryzen", and also there is already an embargo going on which will be lifted on... obviously Jan 9.

Yes, so us Koreans refer Zen+ as second generation and Zen 2 as third generation. So it means Korean distributors got their Zen 2 sample.

I am not sure whether this is just yet another engineering sample, or the sample that is ready for retail. Posts simply say "sample", nothing more.

Appearantly, the distributers are extremely impressed with the performance already, with one saying "beyond incredible". Take this with a grain of salt regarding performance.

No mention of detailed information such as number of cores or clocks.


But one thing seems very certain; we are going to see Zen 2 much earlier than anticipated. I thought it would be Q2 2019 but it seems it is coming out much earlier.

Well, 5 more days.

 

[Vya Domus]

I don't think consumer Zen 2 is anywhere close to release but then again I thought the same about EPYC.

 

[Vario]

Zen2 could be barely better than Zen+, doesn't matter, what matters now is Intel answer to being attacked on all fronts.
It's unbelievable that AMD got to 7/10nm before Intel, after "surviving" with FX for so long. I think it's a combination of good innovation from Zen and lazy complacency from Intel.

No it is because it is the 7nm TSMC process not an AMD in house process. Credit is due to TSMC. Furthermore, Intel's 10nm process is about the same size.

 

[moproblems99]

3770k - 3.5/3.9 ghz
4790k - 4/4.4 ghz
6700k - 4/4.2 ghz
7700k - 4.2/4.5 ghz
8700k (6c/12t) - 3.7/4.7 ghz (4.3 ghz turbo 6c)
9900k (8c/16t) - 3.6/5 ghz (4.7 turbo 8c)

This shows me that the expected frequency jumps are right inline with that to expect. Especially so if some of these leaks are true.

 

[eidairaman1]

This shows me that the expected frequency jumps are right inline with that to expect. Especially so if some of these leaks are true.

So why not 5.0 on all 8 cores?

 

[EarthDog]

This shows me that the expected frequency jumps are right inline with that to expect. Especially so if some of these leaks are true.

Intel's turbo is telling you what AMD's boost will be... how does that work?

So why not 5.0 on all 8 cores?

most will do so with decent cooling already. Out of the box...too much power and no overhead doesnt make for a consumer friendly cpu.

 

[eidairaman1]

Intel's turbo is telling you what AMD's boost will be... how does that work?
most will do so with decent cooling already. Out of the box...too much power and no overhead doesnt make for a consumer friendly cpu.

Reminds me of the 9590.

 

[EarthDog]

Reminds me of the 9590.

The 220W 4.7 ghz highly binned hotplate? Me too!

 

[eidairaman1]

The 220W 4.7 ghz highly binned hotplate? Me too!

Clock bins, look closely at my sig lol.

 

[phill]

Seen some news pop up... I'm still holding out for TPU's review, feel free to throw me one too so I can review it!!

https://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-ryzen-3000-series-matisse-specs,news-59660.html

Taken from Toms site, the link above -

 

[NdMk2o1o]

I'll settle for a 3600x for the 4.8ghz boost (if true of course) and will likely OC all cores to this if possible though should be going off previous Ryzen generations, I currently have a 1600@ 3.9/4.0ghz though have desperately wanted a 4.5ghz+ clock speed which Ryzen+ still couldn't acheive.

I'd still be more than happy with 6c/12t though, can't see them cannabalising the low end 4c/8t parts which at a higher clock speed will still be fantastic entry level CPU or indeed encroaching on the HEDT TR parts with a mainstream 16c/32t mainstream desktop CPU though I could be wrong.

 

[Vya Domus]

That 3700X or whatever is going to be called, if real, will sell like hot cakes.

 

[EarthDog]

3600x will be the big seller. That many cores/threads + whatever IPC increases and boosting to 4.8 GHz (and assuming we can OC to that boost and smidge beyond) + cheap... maybe we'll see Intel pricing drop back to reality.

Though 12/16c and 24/32t on the mainstream makes me want to spit up a bit, lol.

 

[GoldenX]

12 threads is enough for me, just give me 1k shaders of Vega IGP.

 

[Mussels]

I'll take whichever one has the higher boost clocks, i dont need more than 8 cores

 

[SL2]

As we can see, Intel based that roadmap on ryzen rather than giving consumers what they deserved.

It's all up for speculation. It could just as well be the other way around.

AMD launched a 6 core CPU back in 2010, and ~8 core in 2011. Intel simply didn't have to know about Zen, everything pointed towards >4 cores anyway.
Intel were stuck with 14 nm though, and that was the big issue. Those who say that Intel was just lazy with going 10 nm are the same naive people who say "bye byeeee/Game over AMD/Nvidia/Intel!!!1!" at least once a week.
Intel needed to get beyond 14 nm so bad, because even if the competition was down, they still needed to sell new CPU's regardless.
Now that the competition is back, guess what? Intel still doesn't have 10 nm, so much for laziness...

This is coming from me who has always preferred AMD, although my 2600K was too cheap to pass up.

 

[Super XP]

No it is because it is the 7nm TSMC process not an AMD in house process. Credit is due to TSMC. Furthermore, Intel's 10nm process is about the same size.

I've made the exact same point, ZEN via 7nm TSMC process is not going to be a basic upgrade to speed, efficiency etc.,
I believe its going to be somewhat significant. The Process matters a lot.