That’s awesome! Roll on the fat boy at 95w and let’s see what they can do. I’m really looking forward to these.
Stock performance is the performance I am interested in, Overclocks are a bonus and not a given, my 1900X stock performance is pretty good but if I bought with the goal of a big overclock I’d be pretty upset as Ryzen just doesn’t overclock well, so much so that I don't even bother for a measly 200Mhz with all that extra heat. The main things that need to be sorted in Ryzen for me to start giving a **** are clockspeeds +500Mhz min from where they are now or a memory controller capable of hitting 4Ghz+ on DDR4. If precision boost sees some gains I could also be interested, or independent core overclocks would interest me as mine will sit at 4.2Ghz all on a couple of cores no problem but I can't load them all without massive voltage, once all cores loaded it drops to 3.9, I'm sure a few cores in there could probably do more too if precision boost worked
All that extra heat? These things don’t even run warm. Mine on a custom 240mm WC system struggles to hit 50c fully loaded. I know TR is a different beast, but they still don’t run that warm compared to Intel and their CrapPaste (tm).
I wouldn't normally post this but he nailed the RTX series. If this is true? bye Intel !. The thing I find the most exciting though is the G series chip with a 20CU Navi on it. The rumours are that the Navi can match the 1080 with 40 CU, so we could finally be getting a proper APU with some real, true guts. The rest? beyond my dreams. We shall see in January.
Just saying: Any IPC improvement from Zen 1 to Zen 2 + double the cores + over 4 ghz base clock + 5ghz single core turbo = enough to eat the £2K+ 18 core from Intel for breakfast (at stock at least) So yeah no, I don't believe it until its official. Although it would be funny as hell if it actually happened and I'd absolutely want to be a fly on the wall when the people at Intel who came up with the 10 core Skylake refresh #777746456 2019 Edition to counter Zen2 try to explain themselves.
Whatever the lineup is, IMO, AMD will charge the same launch price they have charged already. So (memory not so clear on this) if Ryzen 1800x was $500, then the 2700x was the same or less I don't expect AMD to push up the prices of their replacements in the product stack. As for the clock speeds? and performance? we've never yet had a 7nm CPU unless I have it all wrong again. Just checking now and it seems Coffee Lake is like, 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++++++ We can't really use Intel as a guide here, because they've had so much crap shrinking. From what I understand when you shrink power consumption is down, and thus so are temps so clocks should go up. With Intel they have gone down, then came back up again. I can only attribute that wobble to their severe issues with shrinking. What I am saying is (shortcut around the long way) we've never seen a 7nm from AMD. So until we do? anything could be possible. We may well find that 5.1ghz (which is 99% going to be on a single core) might even be quite lame for 7nm. We won't have the true answer until Intel get there.
Well... they did reduce the top tier chips from $500 to $330 on launch. I paid $360 including taxes for my 2700X. Time to start putting cash to the side to fund X570 and a 3900X if that’s a real thing. I’ll probably stick to an 8 core, dependent on price.
The fact that the 2600 and 2700 are still going cheap at a few places (Scan for one) suggests to me they are trying to get rid of stock and thus Zen 2 could be close. Or I could just be wrong.
They’re outselling Intel at a pace of 2 to 1 in some places... so they’re making up for lower profit margins with higher volumes instead.
Word is AMD will be revealing Zen 2 rollout at CES 2019 in January. Release with X570 at Computex 2019 in May/June.
Yup, and thus creating mindshare. And of course getting people on board to buy more CPUs that will fit in their sockets. Some one elsewhere said "This can't be true, why would AMD give away that many cores and that much performance for $500?" to which I replied "What would you rather do? sell some one a CPU for $800, or sell them three at $500 each?". Nearly every one I know on Ryzen upgraded to the 2700X. Why? because it wasn't wallet busting and hey, may as well right? Land grab ahoy. And, what with Nvidia show their true colours? yup, possible land grab ahoy there too with Navi.
Yeah, let's not get ahead of ourselves here AMD have an opportunity to make up ground on nVidia but if and only if they can actually produce a competitive product. They've done it in the CPU space but I'll wait and see if they can repeat the trick with GPUs. Unfortunately, we've all been burned before by AMD's promises of incredible GPU performance.
I'm not expecting incredible and nor, from what I have seen, is any one else. AMD don't need to compete with Nvidia in performance terms. They can't. If they know what is good for them they will ditch their kitchen sink and do what Nvidia did for so long. IE - stop making Fermi and make small highly clocked dies. The fact that Nvidia have gone back to Fermi gives AMD the perfect opportunity to strike. And from what I have seen Navi is just that. Nothing world beating, just 1070-1080 performance but $250. If that is true? then they will snatch back an enormous chunk of the market. Mostly because an enormous chunk of the market game on 1060s. It also means that if Navi is indeed that fast? then the next gen of consoles will be running on something about as good as a 1070. I can't even begin to explain how mind bendingly powerful that will be for a console. Especially because you can already game at full 4k on a console using a GPU about half as powerful. I've watched many videos where people have tried to build gaming PCs for the same as the Xbox One X and they totally fail to run anything *at all* at 4k. Not even with every setting turned down as low as it will go. And the big bonus could be what we find out about Navi being "Scaleable".
Well sure, if AMD can produce a GPU that delivers GTX1080 performance for $250 then that would be quite something. But don't you think that that sounds a wee bit too good to be true? Don't get me wrong, I'll be straight in there if this comes to pass, but I have my doubts (partly because as I said earlier, we've been here before with AMD's next release always touted as the big leap forward, only for that not to materialise).
I don't find it too good to be true really no. I mean, the RX 580 8gb is now available for £160 or so? and is a decent card (easily as fast as the 1060). So I don't find it too hard to believe that a new tech on a new node can be as good as the 1080, given how Nvidia have derped everything since Vega 64. It is almost like time has stood still since the launch of the 1080. Prices went up, then went absurd, then people were relieved they could buy one 18 months after launch for the same as they paid at launch. It all reminds me of Polaris. AMD said "Hey every one, cheap 970 and 980 !" and pretty much delivered just that. Only at much lower prices (they were selling RRP new for less than second hand 970s and 980s). And that is the business model AMD must stick to. Not trying to compete with a company like Nvidia, they have absolutely no chance of ever pulling off selling a GPU to a gamer for £2499. Remember, everything AMD sell needs to perform like something Intel or Nvidia would charge twice as much for. Anything else? people just don't want it. Fury was rubbish, Vega is rubbish. Both rely on very expensive memory, so can't even be the traditional AMD. What I mean is, traditional as in cheap and twice as much blah blah blah. Polaris was that, Ryzen is that so I have no reason to believe why Navi can't be that also. It was only a matter of time before kitchen sinks would bring about the demise of AMD's GPU dept. They've had people screaming at them ever since the 7970 to stop making Fermi and they've not listened so far. I think Raja brought them back down to earth which is where they need to be.
