AMD confirms its Ryzen CPU will launch in early March, followed by the Vega GPU | PCWorld
What such a good news! I would love to purchase a laptop based on Ryzen APU. I love AMD!
Somehow I think at the price that HP and the other major OEMs get Intel chips (an the prices they charge for bad systems), not having Ryzen isn't going to matter much to them. That, and the vast majority of the people who buy those machines think 1080p is British currency.
Vega being delayed so long though, I'm sure it's because AMD wants to ensure sufficient stock to prevent yet another price runup, but the problem is that the GTX 1080 will have been out a year meaning plenty of stock and nVidia can easily cut the price, so AMD is going to have to drastically undercut it, then it's going to take a while for the actual custom cards to make it to market, unless non-reference cards will be available on day 1, which I doubt as AMD would have said something. This is also assuming AMD doesn't make another stupid engineering decision with the reference edition like they did with the RX 480 which causes a ton of negative publicity.
And of course it still goes without saying that Ryzen performance on Windows 7 and 8 will still show the vast improvement over the FX-8350 that Kaby Lake does, especially if AMD aims to target the Asian market where Windows XP and 7 are still big players. That's why Ryzen still has an asterisk with me, AMD has not compared Ryzen to Skylake or Kaby Lake which have no Windows 7 and 8 support (Skylake does but only on certain OEM machines), all testing has been done on Windows 10 machines.
I am still using an ancient Phenom II X4 processor as this AMD processor already was very much state of the art.
I am looking to modernize eventually but the HD 7870 still has lots of action left in it too.
AMD hardware is very durable, which is very favorable.
Looks like a day earlier, February 28th. That's $295 in USD, which is $55 less expensive than the i7-7700k. Assuming this is a quad core part (and pricing will remain the same between currencies), I doubt AMD would launch an 8 core 16 thread processor at this price point, it looks like a perfect matchup, that's the perfect price for a high end "within reason" system, costing less than a high end video card. It's also been within expectations, as the i7-6900k (which AMD kept comparing Ryzen to) and i7-7700k are equal in terms of performance, only differing when the program uses 5-8 threads, which hardly any non professional programs do. Also it would have the same core speed as the 7700k, providing an apples to apples comparison for the first time in...15 years?
A Pre-Order Listing Shows AMD's Ryzen Desktop Processors Will Likely Ship On February 28 | Digital Trends
AMD Ryzen R7 lineup of 8-core 16-thread CPU Prices Revealed
I call a big fat BS on that site. Looking at the Amazon.es site, the i7-6700k (the only 7700k is the Intel Core i7-7700K 4.2GHz 8MB Smart Cache Caja: Amazon.es: Informática from 3rd party sellers, and is around €400), which is only 8% slower than the 7700k, is €339, while that site lists the R7 1700 at €390. 4 cores which won't be used in games is not worth a €51 price premium, especially if the Ryzen clock is 600mhz slower than the 6700k. AMD will be aiming for a large market share steal from Intel, and with prices like that it won't happen.
I see US 337.89 on Amazon and I probably could find one for even less with some comparison shopping.
With no fan.
US Prices of AMD Ryzen Processors Surface As Well - Starts at $316.59
Still don't believe them, if the last 5 years has showed the world anything it's that per-core speed is as paramount now as it was over a decade ago when dual cores hit the market, and that 8 cores is as useful as a screen door on a submarine in home applications, and the R7 1800X would perform slower than the i7-7700k. Steam reflects the trend, even with all the 8 core AMD processors out there, as well as the few Intels, it only amounts to 0.26% of the Steam market share. Also, why would AMD be as stupid as to not include a Wraith cooler with all models, thereby adding an additional $30 or so to the consumer's cost? These aren't 220w FX 9000 series, these are 95w units, well within the Wraith's capabilities. Then there's the fact that if AMD relegates all quad cores to the R5 moniker, they're going to lose a lot of potential sales to the people who see i7 vs R5 and choose the 7 because it's higher than 5 (you've seen the threads on here where people "upgrade" to a newer video card which is weaker than their current card because it's higher in number).
Then there's the fact that until today, I've never heard of ShopBLT or kikatek, so it is entirely possible these are just sites aiming for free advertisement. Heck, ShopBLT has the 7700k at $325, that's less than Chinese Newegg and Amazon, so it doesn't exactly scream "reputable". If anything it means that a 4 core 8 thread processor similar to the 7700k will also be so similar in price as to not sway the Intel fanboys despite a "design win which has Intel worried". AMD discloses one detail about its Ryzen CPUs that will get Intel worried - Techradar India
AMD is still fine tuning their CPUs with the F4 stepping just being validated after fixing more bugs. AMD wants to be sure the CPUs are working right before formal release.
"What’s interesting is that the listed Ryzen processor uses a clock speed of 4.2GHz for only $295."
If that's the quad core with SMT at a base of 4.2GHz, maybe it could have a turbo speed of 4.5GHz or so to compete with the 7700K? I hope so, it would be great for current games, and I could upgrade to later Ryzen 8 core CPUs with refined stepping...
True, but it will then come down more to motherboard cost and Windows 7 and 8.1 performance, as well as to how final shipping Ryzen performs against Kaby Lake clock to clock, since they've only shown benchmarks against older Broadwell-E. We already know, thanks to anandtech, that the 7700k has the same performance on older OSs as it does with 10, but with more reports coming out stating that AMD will not provide "drivers" for Windows 7 and 8.1, it sounds more like motherboards will be hamstrung, whereas with Kaby Lake you have full functionality, so without a huge performance increase over the 7700k, there's no reason for people to move to Windows 10 to use Ryzen.
AMD's "X" Nomenclature on Upcoming Ryzen Chips Related To XFR Feature | techPowerUp
Essentialy, AMD's "X" nomenclature regarding its upcoming Ryzen chips seems to denote the presence or absence of their touted XFR (eXtended Frequency Range) feature. This is part of AMD's SenseMI Technology suite, which aims to bring higher, intelligent performance to their Ryzen chips through the use of some particular technologies. XFR as it is, appears to be an added, automated overclocking capability to the chip, going further than the Precision Boost clocks would usually allow, supposedly scaling with the cooling performance of the end user's machine. This would fall in nicely with the rated TDP's of the non-X processors being rated at 65 W, with the X-branded, XFR-enabled processors featuring a higher theoretical TDP limit in-line with the capabilities of the XFR feature. As such, while it is true that an AMD Ryzen R7 1700 chip would also have base and boost clocks, much like their 1700X counterpart, the 1700's boost capabilities are designed for the chip not to surpass this 65 W hard limit. The 1700X, however, would be able to dynamically overclock according to the environment and cooling efficiency of the end user's rig, thus allowing it to, in some cases, hit a theoretical power consumption peak at the rated 95 W.
AMD Ryzen Won't Get Dedicated Windows 7 Drivers But Is fully Supported
I wouldn't say FULLY supported, since we know the power API is much improved in Windows 10, so the X series which features higher Turbo clocks could be affected, but it's the other drivers I'm starting to worry about, the "chipset" features.
On the AMD homepage I noticed some 7th generation APU machines for sale with the B350 chipset. Those are socket AM4 processors made on the existing 28nm lines.
The A6 based machine was a tad overpriced in my opinion, at least compared to replacement parts for what I have now
I was considering the Ryzen 7-1700 CPU which has 8 cores and is 65W which will reduce operating costs while keeping Windows 10 etc happy
I like the larger cooler however for overclocking and because they can keep the CPU cooler long term
My existing Phenom II X4 is not hurting but it uses more power being 45nm while Ryzen is 14nm.
I just thought of something. Remember back when Windows 10 was first released it was revealed that the free upgrades were in fact OEM licenses, even turning retail copies of 7 and 8.1 into OEM 10 licenses, and that these licenses were tied to the hardware combination of your system at the time of upgrade? Wonder how much of a headache this will cause people, especially those who don't use a Microsoft Account.
6-core Ryzen 5 1600X Benchmarks seem to be 50% faster than Core i5 7600K
Sadly it looks like that's a Windows 10 system.
I have been using WIndows 10 for so long I am wondering when Windows 11 etc will show up for Q&A testing
Creators update is about 6-8 weeks away
Time is getting closer,Im actually quite Interested to see how this all works out
I'll be interested to see if Intel starts giving away desktop chips to the OEMs the way they do their mobile chips in order to keep AMD repressed in that market as well.
I hope by the time Ryzen goes live we will finally have stable drivers to use. It seems the new drivers break more than they fix and such has been the case since 16.7.3.
Retrieving data ...