AMD's Ryzen CPUs (Ryzen/TR/Epyc) & Vega/Polaris/Navi GPUs

I have put the costs here to show that TR will have equally low pricing, most likely:

Epyc 7601 (32C/64T) (2.2 base/3.2 boost) = $4200.
Epyc 7551 (32C/64T) (2.0 base/3.0 boost) = without pricing yet
Epyc 7501 (32C/64T) (2.0 base/3.0 boost) = $3400

end of July availability:
Epyc 7401 (24C/48T) (2.0 base/3.0 boost) = $1850
Epyc 7301 (16C/32T) (2.2 base/2.7 boost) = $825
Epyc 7281 (16C/32T) (2.1 base/2.7 boost) = $650
Epyc 7251 (8C/16T) (2.1 base/2.9 boost) = $475.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/58113/amd-epyc-32c-64t-flagship-cpu-costs-4200-monster-perf/index.html

 

Ahh... so TR is presumably available August 10, 2017, but not from official AMD sources - just the fact that M/B vendors will ship then.

Sigh...

 

The rumor of July came from Alienware doing Area 51 sales July 27. MB vendors telling release dates are almost always correct. Stop throwing shade when there is nothing to diminish. It just makes you shady!

But, AMD has only said summer 2017 forever. I said August for months. So, the fact that reality and prediction seem to be matching up, when you keep saying "it will never come" in an attempt to discourage people, I believe, is trolling, or, at minimum, discredits you.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Pay attention to what you're replying to. Stop trying to throw a wrench in the conversation when you don't have nothing applicable to state.

The link from TANWare that I'm replying to had no official info at all. That was my point. Deal with it.

I've never said 'it will never come'. Start reading what I've written and stop paraphrasing me incorrectly.

 

You have made statements suggesting it keeps getting delayed and pushed off. What is your end game with those statements, or this one for that matter?

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

@tilleroftheearth is correct, there was no official information, it was the first time I had heard even as a rumor x399's were supposedly given a go ahead for release on 8/10. I would love to give links with official info, but there is none and again AMD is to blame for this state of everyone making guesses and conjecture. We know 7/27 is not happening and there is no promise of 8/10 either, give me an official word stating that and for now maybe I will believe it.

As an AMD fan you just have top admit, the x299 does exist and up to the 7900x does exist as well. It is not vaporware, so far TR and x399 are. I hope this changes sooner than later but we do need to see it change before making any judgements on the platforms.

 

No. Your misinterpretation. What makes you jump to those conclusions?

I am not suggesting it keeps getting delayed; AMD is doing that on it's own. Sure, I commented on it; but that doesn't mean I have an 'end game'. All it means is that I am as frustrated with AMD as everyone else is (with their withholding of info...).

 

How is it vaporware? The only deadline missed so far was consumer Vega, which is based on HBM2. They also separated the launch of the R5 and the Polaris 500 series by one week, but they did not say why one week.

After the Dell announcement, then even you said likely July 27. Then, the correction was August 10, where you got down trodden. Then this link, almost a week later, repeats the same August 10th date. That doesn't make it vaporware when the company said summer release and the dates are within that time period.

Intel having the rushed release with X299 does NOT effect whether the time period is within the period the company gave. Especially when you don't mention that the release was pushed to August by CES, then moved back to June in our around a week or two after that.

Do you have reason to believe it will not be delivered within the summer release window, like the 14-18 cores that were expected 2018, then to October while coffee was moved to Q1 2018? You are conflating things that need not be conflated.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Until it is real it is vaporware. Showing me a chip that is hooked up to nothing, a demo that could be an Epyc with cores disabled, etc. etc.. It does not cut it. Not that I doubt it may materialize but it nor any good creditable info has!

 

TANWare said; 'so far TR and x399 are' 'vaporware'. That's how.

Stop trying to prove how right you are and just admit the facts stand on their own as they are.

Also; the red herrings you keep throwing are visible to the blind now. Please stop and just answer on topic, if you have a contribution at all.

 

Yet you point to Intel, where the 12-18 core still has not been seen or held, nor any credible information presented on. I'm sorry, but when the people who have been consistently on leaked, pre-release information have given something showing that the information is likely good, then you know it is roughly correct. You hold Intel to a lesser standard, as you even jumped to being excited about it until reviews showed how hot it ran and all the other FUBARed aspects of the platform. Vaporware means nothing is really there. Considering Dell, a major OEM, ALREADY ANNOUNCED A SALE DATE, while not having one for the Intel version of the product AT ALL, I'd say that there is good confidence in release within the time window given. Credible enough?

 

Credible enough? No. Not even close.

But before you go off on another tangent; I hold all companies to the same measure; until it is in my hands and I can test it myself; vaporware is as good a term as any to use with their promises.

 

wow, just WOW! considering that you usually have to live with a ridiculous premium for hardware in the server area, we can assume that TR pricing will be THE SAME IF NOT LOWER concerning the 16 core parts.

pricing will have to be adjusted to binning towards higher clocks, since regular con/prosumers would be disappointed at "only" 2.2/2.7 Ghz base/boost, so that will probably take up the server price premium.

which translates to: 16C/32T TR cpus for sub-1000 bucks, loving the sound of that!

seriously, who would even CONSIDER going intel this round?

 

Vaporware - software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.

The design phase is BEFORE tapeout, with minor tweaks after. Now, if someone is defining it solely as unreleased, that is not necessarily accurate. There is an inventory build period (last couple months) that is not related to design.

 

I agree, but you have to remember, the flagship 7351 pricing for the 16C has not yet been announced and runs 2.2/2.9GHz and is estimated to be in the $1100-1200 dollar range. But, then comes the question of whether the lower 16C will be able to achieve the same OC as the higher chips this time, which may be different due to the added complexity of the chip. Also, what was shown is that the lower chips have 2 TDPs that vary on the speed of the ram used (2400MHz vs 2666MHz, the latter adding 15W to the TDP). This means as the speed of the ram increases, the amount of heat generated from either the additional I/O or Infinity Fabric speeds (or even the IMC) increases the package temp a fair amount (although likely less on TR due to only 2 dies and quad channel memory). Just wanted to point that out, but DEFINITELY in agreement with you!

 

I'd guess that's why they are so cheap, the top silicon is going towards TR as odd as it sounds.

 

That and the 32C skus which reach 3GHz boost!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

indeed, VERY important point that TR will only have to deal with the heat of two silicon dies instead of four on ALL Epyc cpus...

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...finity_fabric_and_to_high_yields_amd/dj7ctka/
Interesting analysis on effective yields:
" looncraz • 7h
It's not just possible, but quite probably to be over 95%.

The Ryzen 8-core die should have a perfect yield of 86.1% on 14nm LPP at Global Foundries (defect density of 0.08 per cm2).

That leaves 41 partially damaged die. 60% of them should be usable as six core CPUs considering 2/3rds of the die is a CCX. That is to say that the L3 and uncore are completely undamaged.

That leaves 25 die with damaged L3 or uncore. 50/50 split between what is damaged. AMD sales those with damaged L3 as a Ryzen 5 1400.

That leave 12/13 die with potentially fatal damage. That's a 95.7% effective yield.

The GPIO area is fairly large, taking about 15~20% of the uncore area(including related SRAM). That same percentage of die should be usable as desktop Ryzen (potentially even as 8-core CPUs).

We now have 10 die that are bad from a wafer of 295 die. Or a nearly 97% effective yield.

Effective yield could jump to 99.9% from that baseline with a defective density only marginally better than 0.08/cm2.

That would mean 294 die used per wafer - which means AMD is spending like $30 per die instead of $34 per die using only the perfect ones."

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

If anyone is interested in the Ryzen 1700X, you can use Walmart's "Pick up Discount" to get it for UNDER $300!

 

I agree with @ajc9988. TR isn't vaporware. AMD for the first time, in many years, is not "following the leader". TR isn't a response to any one company or any one product. I believe they realize they have a hit on their hands with TR. TR is coming, just sit back and watch the war play out...as @TANWare wrote before, we [consumers] are the ones that win.

As for Intel, I don't think they are "afraid" but they are acting very unusual. Not many companies that offer a premium product drop the price like they have. The 6950X was $1700 and now its successor is back down to $1000? The 12c/24t is only going to be priced a bit more. That is unusual.

 

A few more details:

[Walmart.com] AMD RyZen R7 1700X - $295 after "Pick-up discount"
http://www.overclock.net/t/1632739/...700x-295-after-pick-up-discount#post_26175145

"If you purchase on-line and select "Pick-Up At Store" in checkout you get an additional $57 off!

h ttp://www.walmart.com

$295 out the door. Pretty hard for me to say no, only reason is Threadripper is coming."

Spoiler

Wow, there's a bunch of CPU's with that "Pickup Discount", try other search tokens, you might find more:
https://www.walmart.com/search/?cat_id=3944_3951_1073804_1072844&facet=pickup_and_deliveryickup+Discount&query=amd+ryzen+cpu&sort=price_high#searchProductResult

Spoiler: Intel 6950x with $93.57 discount

 

Jay made a water-cooled "Oven" that bakes his GPU's and CPU so badly that he needs to run it with the side, top and front panels off to get cooling...poor case choice.

Why I don't use my Ryzen 1800X anymore...

 

Remeber too, the Epyc 16c,32t will most likely not be a TR repackage but like a Ryzen 4 core where each CCX has 2 cores running so a 2x2+2x2+2x2+2x2 instead of 4x4+4x4+4x4+4x4. This then still allows all those PCI-e lanes etc.

So far the TR is vaporware. We have not even seen a single system with one running. let alone proper benchmarks or other pertinent data. Get us a system with a production CPU and x399 board in it and it is no longer vaporware.

 

Did you demand that of Intel in April? Serious question. Did you demand Intel benchmarks and chips in April? Then why do you demand more of AMD than Intel?

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

In April I would have called x299 and 7900x vaporware as well except for the fact there was a 6950 but for claims of higher IPC etc. most definitely vaporware.

 

Links;
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-epyc-pricing-means-amd-ryzen-threadripper-processors_195678

Already shows as fake on the link below the video but I had to include it before someone posts as real.

http://digiworthy.com/2017/05/23/amd-threadripper-cinebench-fake/

 

I'm not saying what you would call it. You did not demand numbers, motherboards, etc. You waited until 2.5-3 weeks before release to start saying anything, and that is because of a trade show where they showed off hardware. AMD showed a chip there and handed out chips to the press at Computex. MB were limited as to design number (we saw like three boards, Giga's, Asrock taichi, and Asus). We know it exists and they are releasing Vega at a trade show two weeks before release of TR. So, wouldn't it be fair to wait until then to complain. They've given more earlier than Intel, yet you continuously complain about that. They gave a season instead of a month or quarter. Whenever a range is given, at least with electronics, people almost always assume it is at the end of that range. I called August months ago. Now, it is a waiting game, no matter how much we want more.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Usually we have a lot of fun here speculating, but for some reason in these threads there's way more salt than I'm used to.

 

I think it's a mixture of the panic'd flop sweat oder of the Intel fanboy's mixing with the surprise and joy pheromone's spritzing from Team AMD.

It's all so confusing, surprise and disbelief on both sides seems to be the theme, and with talk of "vaporware" - it feels like the '80's all over again

Hey!!, AI is back, Virtual Reality is back, self-driving cars are back, and UNIX is replacing MS Windows!!

Wow, it is the 80's all over again.

 

I did not demand Numbers from Intel as they already had a product for me to consider and the new one, product, was not under consideration. I knew Intel with the 6950 already beat out a 1800x and never doubted a 16 core TR would beat out the new 7900x. To what degree there is a question though. Now I can't say I need th 7900x numbers to compare toa TR 16 core when I don't have those numbers yet.

I would have waited happily to august if they would have published the benchmarks so I know what I was waiting for, prices and firm dates would have been nice too.

 

Now, I do agree those things would be nice, but we have always obtained that through leaks, mostly, until maybe a week out from release or day of release for most embargo dates. We got a bit more on how epyc is designed, what improvements were made, but have no 16 core out yet. The first released chips for EPYC are the flagship chips, with the lower ones coming in July (almost makes me wonder if they didn't want the server chip to be misconstrued as the power of the TR, as the best dies are going for the 32 core Epyc chips and 16 core TR chips).

What we care about is how the b2 stepping, made for EPYC and TR, not R7, 5, & 3, will do, the IF gearing, memory support, and how well it does graphics and other I/O. With Epyc already being bought and supported by large companies, we will see...


Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

That's to be expected though. It's a lot like this around the web, some places more brutal than others. It's calm waters here and I expect when TR does launch, we are going to have a lot of fun showcasing rather than speculating.

 

Back? I never gave up on VR.

 

They have already earned my money (barring a major change from Intel on the 12 core, but it would have to be major), I'm just hoping EK or Bitspower will have at least a CPU block, if not a board block, ready to go on release. Water chilled board, GPU, etc., we'll see what may come...

 

I hope so! I'm just happy there's so much new stuff coming at the moment.

 

Either your or my math is off - the top i9 is expected to cost $2000, so the price goes up if anything (top line for top line). I do understand that core count for core count the price drops, usually that's how it should go. What I'm saying is intel did quite a few "odd" things lately, but the pricing seems to be spared and continues the tradition. To be honest, I'm not even sure if they are THAT greedy, after all you can only get that much perfect 18 core dies working at certain speed, hence the pricing. I was patiently (and not so much) waiting for more information about how InfinityFabric scales. AMD REALLY made a great design if you ask me - cheap, scalable, easier to get to certain performance mark, almost (not to say) zero waste. It's funny how intel had this very same setup a decade ago. Makes me wonder how a Q6600 or QX9300 would perform with recent AMD optimizations and yes I do realize that, aside from the separate cores, there's almost nothing in common.

 

Cheap I think is going to be a huge factor when compared to performance. That's where AMD can really shine this time around.

 

Cheaper yes, but if Ryzen is any indication, there's a very good chance it will also approach Intel in performance as well.
I don't understand why people only say AMD is cheaper when performance wise we will probably get 85 to 90% of performance as well vs comparable Intel CPU's (taken into account clock advantages for Intel), so essentially, AMD will be close enough performance wise while also being 2x cheaper.
Unless you guys are expecting 40 to 50% performance difference going into Intel favor (and I really have no idea on what exactly would people be basing this).
This isn't bulldozer architecture.

 

I guess I didn't really communicate that well, I meant cheap comparing at the same performance level.

 

Links;
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...portedly_able_to_use_99_9_of_ryzen_cpu_dies/1

 

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-power-hungry-rumor/
So, it wants to sip down power like a lush sips down whiskey--straight from the bottle. But, proof is in the pudding and in 5 days that pudding will be on sale, at least for the Frontier Edition. So...

Edit: it should be noted that the Titan Xp also only uses 250W of power, since that is what this card is really going up against, not the 1080 Ti, which the gaming one will square against (although it seems they will both have the same power requirements from AMD). Also, you cannot compare clockspeed on the different architectures to get the full story...

 

All I am going to say is, competition is good. I am already seeing the 6950X under 1K in a few places new and a couple used hovering around $900. I'll wait until the end of August to make my move.

 

Links (an actual Epyc mainboard);
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11567...tn70ab8026-server-1p-16-dimms-26-ssds-oculink

Actual Epyc Presentation;
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...AB1F10306B47A6C39BBEAB1F10306B47A&FORM=VRDGAR

Vega (power draw again)
https://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/06/22/msi_damn_rx_vega_needs_lot_power

Edit; I'll have to add when it comes to gamers, there are some that want that 15% faster despite 40% (or so) more power draw. But in the end we shall see.

 

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/58147/amd-radeon-rx-vega-price-excellent/index.html
Rumor on Vega pricing: it will be excellent.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Preorder;
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-laptop-lt-24k-as.html

 

time for a TR/Vega build, yummm....

Sent from my HUAWEI NXT-AL10 using Tapatalk

 

It's important to find out if AMD is allowing forced crossfire in driver support. Also, remember the Vega uses 300W, 375W under water, which the gaming version is supposed to match the Vega FE. If you throw 3 Vega in a system, there goes 900W (1125W under water), but is supported in full 48 lanes, with 4 more going to the chipset, leaving 12 lanes for anything else, like network cards or NVMe drives. So, let's hope they are pushing crossfire support in game drivers!!!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

That is truly scary, 1125w and it is probably all from the 12v rail too. Think about it, almost 100 amps just to do 3d gaming. Just amazing.

 

We have to remember, for gaming, over two cards is abnormal. For professional work, we've been having this conversation in the other thread. Professional Video editing can utilize more cards without having to have the cards in SLI. Because of this, you could have 4 1080 Ti or Titan Xp for 1000W over using 3 Vega Frontier edition for 900W (or the higher 1125W). If you have a 1600W PSU, then you can run 1440W if it is made for 90% load. That can theoretically support the 3 AMD cards or 4 Nvidia cards, with the CPU TR and the ram, but you are getting to the absolute limits of a 1600W PSU, making dual PSU look much more attractive (especially since you can get 850W+ likely for half the cost of a single 1600W PSU).

Now, Vega is supposed to be at the Ti and Titan level, but power consumption needs considered. So, I do agree.

Edit: I also didn't bring up Deep Learning, which can use 4-8 cards and would require a second power supply for the higher cards, but then you are buying cards, most likely, above even the Titan (TV100 comes to mind, or Vega FE/Vega Pro coming soon). So...