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

I updated the Taichai x399 with the 1.80 bios and AGESA 10.0.0.4 and ended up with 78 error stuck on boot. Ended up quickly doing and emergency BIOS recovery, and all is back to normal. Just want to give a heads up.

 

I had a similar experience. I don't have it stuck, but noticed it sucks down more wattage and my ram isn't able to be as tight as it was on the last bios. But, want to do more testing.

Also, I'm getting a 6 beep FC code when overclocking the ram, but cannot find what the cause is. It still boots and ram is error free (I'm in the process of tightening timings, but am doing my checks as I go), but it is annoying each boot.

If anyone can find what AGESA 1.0.0.4 changes on TR, we'd be greatly appreciative.

 

I was suspicious because AGESA is right now on 1.0.0.6b. Maybe this is an older (Newer) compatibility release? unless there are two AGESA one for x370 and one for x399?

 

No, this is a new release. Whereas the AGESA on Ryzen was 1.0.0.6b, TR was on 1.0.0.3. So we are going to a new AGESA, just like Ryzen is going to 1.0.0.7. So, 1.0.0.7 adds compatibility with raven and pinnacle ridges. For AM4, Elmor said it required rebuilding the bios entirely, so bound to have some bugs. If the same is true for TR going to 1.0.0.4 from 1.0.0.3, then it means growing pains and having to work through new errors injected in the new build. His statement applied to ASUS boards, but I'd bet it is true of all.

Edit: go to the mb tab of CPU-Z. It will show the AGESA version on there.

 

I would stay away from 1.0.0.4 then. Version 1.70 of bios seems perfectly stable for me right now. I believe with the x399 Taichai even more so being as we are more firmly controlled on vcore from the board and not the CPU's scheme.

 

Also, if you set the fans to run off of cpu temp instead of the t junction on the new bios, they don't work for throttling up or down. I've noticed a couple other things, but...

 

Just put it in again, working this time, and noticed I had to reset the fan ramps as well. Slightly lower CB scores too.

 

https://overclock3d.net/news/gpu_displays/raja_koduri_officially_joins_intel_as_chief_architect/1

So, I'm wondering who AMD now gets and the leeway given to them to design new products moving forward.

 

I'm sure we'll have that info soon. Right now Dr. Lisa Su has that lead.

Maybe this will be a promotion from within?

See:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12011/raja-koduri-resigns-from-amd

 

Even though it is nice to think they promote from within, I'm betting on a poaching from Nvidia or the arm graphics chip designers, tbh. I wouldn't say Apple, although it isn't ruled out, but maybe from Google's new projects for graphics compute (did you see the news on the Pixel 2 processing), or something similar. It really is hard to say though, and depends if they are going to tie multiple dies together like Epyc, TR, and soon Nvidia.

Meanwhile, this is Intel's direct response to the Nvidia threat. It also suggests the AMD tie-in for Intel will be good! Some news agencies tried blasting it because the Xbox one X has more power, but they do forget that was a custom chip and runs on a heavily optimized system with better optimized API, to a degree. But, the fact it approaches 4 teraflops is quite impressive for what it is!

But I'm sure Su has a plan and is quite capable, as she has proven herself to be. Also I'm sure she has a list of people and they are already in touch with them for the hire. After all, corps move quick with things like this, and that choice has to be good. But, we must remember, AMD poached Intel people recently for the CPU side, which helped lead to the creation of TR (by him giving them the leeway to do the design and create it once the ambitious engineers told him about it). So I'm sure this shake-up will be good for everyone!

 

360 vs. 240 Radiator for Threadripper (Liqtech TR4 & Noctua)

Noctua Coolers for Threadripper

 

I found some more news on the 12nm Leading Process Glofo will be using for Ryzen+ and Vega refresh.

https://www.hpcwire.com/2017/09/24/globalfoundries-puts-wind-amds-sails-12nm-finfet/

"From its annual tech conference last week (Sept. 20), where GlobalFoundries welcomed more than 600 semiconductor professionals (reaching the Santa Clara venue’s max capacity and doubling 2016 attendee numbers), the one-of-four foundry business launched a raft of announcements, including a new 12nm FinFET process for high performance applications."

So, depending on the process capabilities, AMD might actually be able to clock Ryzen to same levels like current Intel CPU's are... or possibly even higher (considering the smaller node).

As I mentioned before, IPC uplifts will likely have to wait until Ryzen 2, but we don't know if AMD decided to tweak the Ryzen 1 uArch further for this refresh.

At any rate, this process will probably help Vega refreshes as well by dropping their power consumption radically at same clocks (seeing how the current 14nm process from Glofo is just hindering Vega at current frequencies), and possibly allow AMD to clock Vega to same frequencies as Pascal on the core.
Though, considering that we saw limited increases in performance with clock boosting vs HBM overclocks, it would be a lot better for AMD to focus on radically increasing HBM2 on Vega56+ to say 1100MhZ, and Vega 64 HBM to 1400 MhZ, while either keeping the clocks the same, or just giving them a minor bump.

 

And of course, there's industry software optimizations to take into account.
I suspect that the IPC advantage Intel currently holds over ryzen of about 5% might lie predominantly in the industry using Intel compilers (Cinebench) and software being explicitly optimized to run on Intel CPU's (which of course has been confirmed in various reviews).

But if AMD clocks Ryzen to same or similar frequencies like Intel did, then aside from obvious software optimizations, people won't have any other excuse to claim Intel is superior.
I strongly doubt that 5% difference at same clocks would be a justified expenditure of much higher quantities of money.
Heck, even now, the performance differential even with Intel clocking higher don't justify its higher cost in every case. 8700k might be an exception to the rule, but considering that people with existing AM4 platforms will mainly have to replace the CPU alone (as opposed to the motherboard as well), I just don't see how viable Intel would be.
And their 10nm CPU's have yet to be released... while AMD plans to come out with Ryzen 2 in late 2018 likely.

I'd like to see Asus including microcode updates for my GL702ZC in that case, as I'd definitely be interested in upgrading to Ryzen 2 (same or more cores at same or better TDP at much higher stock frequencies and possibly with a Vega iGP included as standard).

Either way, 12nm LP might turn out to be a huge step up for AMD. Ryzen is already really efficient... I'm hoping this will continue onto 12nm and 7nm.

 

3 Months With Ryzen 7 - Was The Switch Worth It?

 

Doesn't help much if Ryzen still can't come up on same or better level for overclocking!! Time will tell.

 

Here is a video that made me laugh really hard. Each of the points made I can agree with to varying degrees. The conclusion? Not so much.

40 hours saved a year is enough for me to consider switching/upgrading platforms - but considering how many times it has crashed on him - I don't think the Ryzen system is ahead overall for at least another 6 months...

While the ability to multitask with thread heavy programs running simultaneously is great - I would find it like going back to 1955 for my workloads (LR, especially... as mentioned in the video) and the 'snappiness' I crave from my setups. Nor could I find myself happy with running older drivers on a new/current platform for the sake of a non-crashing system.

Sitting at just over 8 months since Ryzen was available (at least to a select few back then), this is still the very reasons why Ryzen or any other AMD platform has failed to entice me for any length of time (ever). Even though with every passing month they do seem to get a bit better.

I actually had a brief taste of a local boutique O/C'd Ryzen 1800x setup. I patted it on the head and said 'good dog' and just kinda walked away. Not that it did anything inherently wrong. But there was nothing about the 8C/16T setup that seemed especially fast/snappy to me.

If I was rendering videos and playing games and/or doing other productivity work simultaneously - I can see how a Ryzen platform may be tempting today. Doing what I do though? I would have given the test system away to my least favorite grandkid.

 

Wow, looks like good news for AMD on both the CPU & GPU fronts! This sounds like it will make itself even more competetive against Intel. If they can hit the same clocks as Intel then there's really not gonna be much in it!

 

The large majority of people don't overclock (and it's overrated, plus not particularly healthy for system longevity). That's not the point of the CPU, and even businesses won't be overclocking.

But, that's pretty much moot if AMD gets ryzens frequencies to same or higher levels than Intel. Like on Intel 14nm++ process, you can probably expect an upper limit of 5ghz (or slightly less) when overclocking.

However, this depends on how high frequencies the process allows. And it IS a smaller process than Intel is using, so we will need to wait and see.

 

Overclocking has been more and more popular... See f.eks unlocked BGA. All advertice this as a nice feature now. Look into all OEM/resellers websites. You will see what I mean.

Regarding longevity... Have never had problems with this. Have always run my chips oc’d. None of your points is especially valid. At least not for me

 

Cooling can make a difference, but overclocking usually stresses the CPU in terms of increasing the voltage beyond intended parameters, and of course, you are not representative of the wider population.
Even if BGA parts are sold as unlocked, how many people actually go through the trouble of overclocking? Statistically speaking, it's a small number. Most people who use computers don't even know how to overclock. And besides, it also depends on the hardware's silicon quality.
Plus, there's also the type of cooling to be taken into account. If you end up spending ridiculous amount of money on cooling the machine for a 10-15% overclock that yields limited increases in performance at best, that really makes little sense.

As I said, usually overclocking is mostly for people who benchmark and want to see high numbers... if the overclock makes a difference between unplayable and playable framerates, then I might agree with you, but it doesn't always work that way.
Furthermore, productivity usually benefits more from multiple cores as opposed to higher clocks and software optimizations.

 

Now, I won't contradict all of what you said, including your personal experience with the system. But, you cannot blame the system for him not doing a fresh install. Sometimes you even have to do that on Intel systems, and it is and was a known issue, so that is on him. Same with driver compatibility, as driver programming is controlled by Nvidia, not AMD, thereby meaning you are blaming AMD for actions of its competitor putting out a ****ty driver. That makes no sense whatever in this context!!! Also, the least favorite grandkid is a bit harsh, but who am I to judge.

With that said, he is going to test out the 8700K soon, which, with his current productivity suite from Adobe, will perform better almost assuredly (or at least on everything except premiere at bare minimum). But we've already discussed Adobe not optimizing for multi-thread and core speed being king with its software, don't need to rehash that. So, not disagreeing with the gist of your statement, just certain aspects.

Also, anyone complaining about the BIOS onslaught for Ryzen has forgotten the same onslaught with X99, X299, and other Intel chipsets. So, that part I give a pass. Where I don't is AMD still has locked features that they don't talk about and have not activated on both the CPU and GPU Vega products. I understand needing to work out bugs, but we are over 6 months on Ryzen and 4-5 months on VEGA. Now, for the TR Bios, mine just worked, and has worked, since day one. If you got an Asus, so many errors. But that comes down to MB manufacturer. Which reminded me of his issue with the external HDD caddy. Is it really Ryzen at issue, or the MB. I really wish he had tested that with another board to be sure (including another board from another manufacturer).

Overall, it is, but hold your horses on singing praises for 12nm. Very little is known about the process other than some potential energy inefficiencies. We don't know if that will translate to a speed boost or not. You will get minor tweaks and that can improve IPC slightly, as well as other aspects of performance. So taking a breath and waiting for something concrete is what I'd recommend. Also, there is a good chance the 7nm Navi is being produced at TSMC, so that is where the more excitement should be had, as well as waiting for word on the new addition of a competitor packaging the HBM2/Die on chip.

You are both correct and not. Overclockers help to drive demand, by showing superiority in extreme use cases, or now showing what extra performance could be had. Why do you think the internet was PISSED at Intel's response to the fluctuating voltage spikes when Intel's response was "Just don't overclock"? ( @Papusan knows what I'm talking about).

But, aside from that, Ryzen would have to match Intel's overclocked speeds on their stock or minor OC for your statement to fully be true (back to the argument of not leaving performance on the table like Intel does just so people can have "the feels"). But, right now, it isn't just about the extra speed, as it is the better performer in an absolute sense. So not a good line of argument.

Smaller doesn't always mean more speed. Intel proved that, to a degree. Especially with this being a half node. In fact, 10nm Intel is supposed to have weaker transistor performance than 14nm++. That is why I don't talk about cannonlake. It is slowly being relegated to low power devices and may be the new Broadwell **** stain. So we cannot just pump it up, unduly, when we have no basis for it yet. At least the specs on the 7nm process say that it is targeting 5GHz for HPC, meaning server components, which would suggest that the mainstream and HEDT may reach 5GHz+. That is something to base it on. The 12nm refresh is a slightly smaller half node which has no information on it that I have seen (and I just checked the GloFo page, only the general press release, not much on our purpose of speculation). So let's not build up this refresh, thereby making the hype greater than delivery. That is one of the main reason AMD gets so much slack on certain product releases, even when they don't build them up, like recently.

 

As he described the issues I thought, did you do a fresh OS install? And, he finally answered that, no he didn't, and when he did that the problems stopped.

We already knew there were teething problems upon release, as there are with other CPU and platform releases, I've had similar issues with Intel CPU releases over the years as well.

IDK if the z370 / z270 / z170 continuity should be considered a plus or a really aggravating minus, I guess the stability is nice, but the poor support for same socket CPU's across the line sucks. That makes it a definite no go for me as a recommendation.

The BIOS updates and improvements keep coming from AMD, and solid stability was there for fresh installs for everyone, noone else was complaining of issues like this, except for getting high RAM speed, but it's the same for Intel.

What I take away from the video and their long term experience is, pay attention to the basics, which I see everyone reminding everyone else here, I don't think it's a problem with Ryzen, it's a problem with the reviewers own build management.

 

AMD Cards Not Compatible With DK2 After Oculus Platform Update

"AMD could potentially address the problem with a driver update if it so desired. For now, DK2 owners with AMD graphics cards can either put their headset away or get an Nvidia graphics card."

 

Wait a minute. They are blaming AMD compatibility issues on changes made by another program. Are they daft? Now, there may be a workaround on AMD's end, but it literally could have been the changes to the program itself that is the entire issue. Considering it worked with those cards before the update, why are they not placing blame on the **** coding? It literally is a hit piece.

 

It still work with Nvidia. Up to AMD to push out updated driver with a fix as Oculus no longer supports the DK2. I expect both Nvidia and AMD have a close dialogue with Oculus. This shoudn't come like a bomb on AMD.

 

First, it doesn't matter if it works with Nvidia or not in this case. If the programmer, in designing it, only considered and debugged for Nvidia drivers, without testing the effect on AMD, YOU GET THE SAME EXACT OUTCOME! That doesn't make it a driver issue, that makes it **** programming!

Second, just because AMD can work around the **** programmer's programming and lack of debugging, you cannot blame them for the sudden incompatibility. You don't even know, and seem to assume, Nvidia changed their driver beforehand and AMD did not. Without more information, that is pure speculation.

So, taken together, other than AMD supposedly knowing they were going to **** the code up when dropping support, where is this AMD's fault again?

 

Honestly, I wouldn't put it past AMD's driver team. History has shown them to have a lack of concern for backwards compatibility. Just ask Unwinder (RivaTuner/Afterburner/RTSS creator) how many times AMD driver updates have broken compatibility with his program.

 

This doesn't help the AMD owners. Up to AMD to fix this now. Or forget it. We have to see what will come.

 

The same driver worked before the update, then didn't after. If it was a new driver that came out from AMD, and installing that driver showed dropped support, I'd agree. Here, same driver, stops working after update. That sounds like software changes created the specific bug, not drivers.

I do agree, unless it isn't in the driver that the problem is found. Some things in code cannot simply be fixed by making changes in the driver. Think of all the borked games out there.

That is why I take issue with this article. It assigns blame without proof of blame.

 

None know exactly who you should blame. AMD owners is Screwed if Oculus don't lift a finger for this... Then it's up to AMD to see what they can do. If both don't lift a finger... You then know the final outcome. Nvidia will win on this. The question is... Will AMD let them?

 

It's not as much of a contest if it is being discontinued. That is the thing. Granted, no one wants immediately cut off, but there is a chance AMD cannot fix it on their end. If they cannot, then you are blaming them for things out of their control. That is what I take issue with. More info is needed tbh.

 

HP ENVY x360 Convertible Laptop - 15z touch
AMD Ryzen™ 5 2500U Quad-Core (2 GHz, up to 3.6 GHz, 6 MB cache) + AMD Radeon™ Vega Graphics
Ships on: 11/27/2017
$ 734.99 => Discounted to $ 599.99
http://store.hp.com/us/en/pdp/hp-envy-x360-convertible-laptop-15z-touch-1za07av-1

• Windows 10 Home 64
• AMD Ryzen™ 5 2500U Quad-Core (2 GHz, up to 3.6 GHz, 6 MB cache) + AMD Radeon™ Vega Graphics
• 8 GB DDR4-2400 SDRAM (2 x 4 GB)
• 15.6" diagonal FHD UWVA micro-edge WLED-backlit multitouch-enabled edge-to-edge glass (1920 x 1080)
• 1 TB 7200 rpm SATA
• Office Software Trial
• Security Software Trial
• 3-cell, 55.8 Wh Lithium-ion prismatic Battery
• No DVD or CD Drive
• Full-size island-style backlit keyboard with numeric keypad
• HP Wide Vision FHD IR Camera with Dual array digital microphone (Touchscreen)
• Intel® 802.11ac (2x2) Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth® 4.2 Combo"

Spoiler: Full Specs and Options List

Product specifications

Operating system
Windows 10 Home 64
Windows 10 Pro 64

Processor and graphics
AMD Ryzen™ 5 2500U Quad-Core (2 GHz, up to 3.6 GHz, 6 MB cache) + AMD Radeon™ Vega Graphics

Display
15.6" diagonal FHD UWVA micro-edge WLED-backlit multitouch-enabled edge-to-edge glass (1920 x 1080)

Memory
8 GB DDR4-2400 SDRAM (2 x 4 GB)
12 GB DDR4-2400 SDRAM (1 x 4 GB, 1 x 8 GB)
16 GB DDR4-2400 SDRAM (2 x 8 GB)

Hard drive
1 TB 7200 rpm SATA
256 GB PCIe® NVMe™ M.2 SSD
1 TB 7200 rpm SATA; 128 GB M.2 SSD
360 GB PCIe® NVMe™ M.2 SSD
1 TB 7200 rpm SATA; 256 GB M.2 SSD
512 GB PCIe® NVMe™ M.2 SSD
1 TB PCIe® NVMe™ M.2 SSD

Office software
Office Software Trial
$20 off Microsoft® Office 365 Personal 1-year
$20 off Microsoft® Office 365 Home 1-year
$20 off Microsoft® Office Home and Student 2016
$50 off Microsoft® Office Home and Business 2016
$70 off Microsoft® Office Professional 2016

McAfee LiveSafe(TM) Security Software
Security Software Trial
$40 off McAfee LiveSafe 12 months
$89.99 off McAfee LiveSafe 24 months
$169.98 off McAfee LiveSafe™ 36 months

Theft protection
Computrace LoJack for Laptops, One Year
Computrace LoJack for Laptops, Two Years
Computrace LoJack for Laptops, Four Years

Primary battery
3-cell, 55.8 Wh Lithium-ion prismatic Battery

Keyboard
Full-size island-style backlit keyboard with numeric keypad

Personalization
HP Wide Vision FHD IR Camera with Dual array digital microphone (Touchscreen)

Wireless technology
Intel® 802.11ac (2x2) Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth® 4.2 Combo

Battery life
Up to 9 hours [3]

Video Playback Battery Life
Up to 7 hours and 15 minutes [3]

Battery Recharge Time
Supports battery fast charge: approximately 90% in 90 minutes [5]

Audio
Dual speakers

Pointing device
Touchpad with multi-touch gesture support

Expansion slots
1 multi-format SD media card reader

External I/O Ports
1 USB 3.1 Type-C™ Gen 1 (Data Transfer up to 5 Gb/s, DP1.2, HP Sleep and Charge); 2 USB 3.1 Gen 1 (1 HP Sleep and Charge); 1 HDMI v2.0a; 1 headphone/microphone combo

Power supply
65 W AC power adapter

Energy efficiency
ENERGY STAR® certified; EPEAT® Silver registered

Dimensions (W X D X H)
14.16 x 9.8 x 0.77 in

Weight
4.75 lb

Warranty
1 year limited hardware warranty (information at www.hp.com/support); 90 day phone support (from date of purchase); complimentary chat support within warranty period (at www.hp.com/go/contacthp)

Software included
McAfee LiveSafe™ 30-day trial offer (Internet access required. First 30 days included. Subscription required for live updates afterwards.)

Ryzen Mobile's First Laptop Is Out!
Published on Nov 13, 2017
Ryzen Mobile's first laptop is officially on sale. It's the HP Envy X360 2-in-1.

 

Some interesting takes on Raja's move, Intel's MCM use of Vega / Polaris GPU's, etc. I'll add more here as I find them.

HW News: Radeon Chief Leaves AMD for Intel, RAM Supply Surge

The Raja Saga: From ATI, AMD, Apple and back again to the Stars (Vega & Navi) & Intel

AMD Inside - The Beginning of the End for Nvidia in PC?

 

@hmscott Is discount over? I see 805$

 

I see the same price.

 

@hmscott - So, I thought about this for awhile and want to bounce this off of you.

For Zen 2 (not the Ryzen refresh), the rumor has gone from a 48-core chip to a 64-core chip. If we assume that only 4 dies will be used on the PCB, this means that there is a potential increase in cores per CCX to 8-cores. This would mean that TR would have a bottom of 16 cores (could still be 8, but...) and top of 32, but this question of design applies to mainstream chips. The APUs and chips for mobile only have 4-cores and a single CCX. My thought is, for mainstream, they may have plans for a single CCX 8-core on Zen2, which would have increases due to no more inter-CCX latency on die. That, plus the increased cache sizes, could mean much improved performance on a second generation Zen processor, before examining other modifications to the chip. This is an updated thought from the 48-core rumor and speculation of 6-cores per CCX. I don't think I mentioned this from the other day when you posted about the 64-core successor to EPYC.

Thoughts?

 

Links? What Zen2 speculations with those specs are you referring to?

 

$805 for what, where?

The discounts are off a number of sites I looked at, and wild prices are in their place, although there are some under the MSRP for the 1950x, Walmart has the 1950x for $1300+!!

https://www.walmart.com/search/?query=threadripper&cat_id=3944_3951_1073804_1072844&facet=brand:AMD

https://www.google.com/shopping/product/13199903022947125456/online?q=threadripper 1950x&rlz=1C1CHNY_enUS714US714&biw=1151&bih=621&prds=paur:ClkAsKraX0PpjKQmKIAh7nbRygZMmZ-0UY92npMNy4ScamoUc7hbue-lZQ-Dxd84keaGH9Rdc5w2ruOE9T2qzIwcIUcl22IiTQ0kTwOuupeFqPSSM9eqGIxWoRIZAFPVH71kyfUevd_bWHsYestm6HaTcRzjHQ,scoring&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZ7L-J-77XAhXKgFQKHR8wAN4Q6SQIHg

newegg has "normal" prices for ThreadRipper, with some bundle discounts...
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...hreadripper&ignorear=0&N=100007671&isNodeId=1

There are still some discounts on Ryzen on newegg, some expiring in 10 hours some in 7 days...:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=amd+ryzen&ignorear=0&N=100007671 601295133&isNodeId=1

Microcenter still has the ThreadRipper's on sale!
http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?Ntt=1950x

 

https://hothardware.com/news/amd-epyc-2-64-cores-128-threads-and-256mb-l3-cache

 

That's the Epyc article I posted a while back, but there is no mention of Zen 2 in that article.

 

It is directly getting at Zen 2. Here is the logic on this:

EPYC is a zen zeppelin complex with b2 stepping whereas Ryzen and TR are a zen CCX dual complex with b1 stepping. Epyc will likely skip the ryzen refresh 12nm node. TR follows layout and design, to a degree, of EPYC. So, changing to accept 8 dies instead of 4 seems less likely, although not impossible. This would suggest in an increase of cores per CCX OR the number of CCXs per die, potentially. Hence the deductions of this discussing Zen 2 (with the starship rumor being from last year of 48 cores, which I can pull up if needed). Does that make more sense on why I believe it is discussing the 7nm design, which makes a lot more sense since that cuts the footprint of components by nearly half, which would allow the core numbers to scale up. So lots of assumptions embedded in my analysis, admittedly. This is why I wanted to bring it up for discussion.

 

Lol... your link, first post.

 

It's a bit early to discuss, I think I'll wait till more info is available. No sense figuring this out for Intel, let them do it themselves

 

Fair enough and I completely understand that! I just like playing the speculation game sometimes! And I do try to follow the logic and what could potentially be coming down the road. Part of the joys of predictions. Then I will leave this here until more comes forth in the coming 9+months.

 

There will likely be announcements, teasers, and "leaks" to keep us interested in between times

 

I hear you. I didn't even mention why I think it is core increases per CCX versus increased CCXs, but if it is increased CCXs, the potential results are mind boggling! But I won't say why!!!

 

Ah, now I see what you are talking about.

It looks like that model's HP sale is over, sorry

Actually I was coming here to post this info on BestBuy's sale of their HP Ryzen 2500U model configuration, which is $749, higher than the old sale price on HP's site, but now - coincidentally - lower than it is now at $804.99

That's probably why HP raised the price, so as to not undercut BestBuy's price:

HP - 2-in-1 15.6" Touch-Screen Laptop - AMD Ryzen 5 - 8GB Memory - 1TB Hard Drive - HP finish in dark ash silver
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/hp-2-i...sh-in-dark-ash-silver/6124570.p?skuId=6124570

I received an email about it from AMD:


The HP site model has bumped up RAM from 8GB to 12GB:

• Windows 10 Home 64
• AMD Ryzen™ 5 2500U Quad-Core (2 GHz, up to 3.6 GHz, 6 MB cache) + AMD Radeon™ Vega Graphics
• 12 GB DDR4-2400 SDRAM (1 x 4 GB, 1 x 8 GB)
• 15.6" diagonal FHD UWVA micro-edge WLED-backlit multitouch-enabled edge-to-edge glass (1920 x 1080)
• 1 TB 7200 rpm SATA
• Office Software Trial
• Security Software Trial
• 3-cell, 55.8 Wh Lithium-ion prismatic Battery
• No DVD or CD Drive
• Full-size island-style backlit keyboard with numeric keypad
• HP Wide Vision FHD IR Camera with Dual array digital microphone (Touchscreen)
• Intel® 802.11ac (2x2) Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth® 4.2 Combo

https://twitter.com/LisaSu/status/929885959918845952

 

HP is really getting greedy to be charging such hefty prices for a low end machine (it's pretty powerful/capable, but still low end).
This machine shouldn't cost more than $400-$450 with 16GB RAM (2x 8GB).
And The $805 price is with a 1TB HDD... they offer an SSD (256GB) for EXTRA $130.
Excuse me but whom do these people think they are fooling?
More importantly, how are they getting away with it?

Even worse, back in late 2008, I was able to get my Acer 5930G with P9650 CPU (2c./2th), 3GB RAM and a DEDICATED MID RANGE 9600m GT GPU (MXM no less) for £600.
It's nearly a decade later and the prices are ridiculously high.
What gives?
This AMD APU system is not a mid range system by any stretch of the word... its a low end system (granted it's a lot more powerful than my Acer ever was in every single aspect and very capable in terms of modern consumer technology, but regardless)... and it's 9 years LATER...
The fact people are expected to pay MORE (because in UK, the thing would be priced at £804.99) for a low-end system than what I paid for a mid-range system a a dGPU in 2008 is OBSCENE.

It's price gauging and artificial inflation.
I know RAM got more expensive, but again, its artificial inflation.

Also, my GL702ZC costs roughly £1600.
The AMD APU system is practically half the price, but it's nowhere near as powerful... it's not even a mid-range system. Mid range systems with mobile RX 580/GTX 1060 should be the price of this HP laptop.


There was an article about OEM's inflating the price of laptops with AMD APU's before to the levels of more powerful Intel/Nvidia systems which discouraged people from getting the AMD systems of course.
They may not be building lousy systems by crippling performance (which has yet to be seen of course given that we just don't know how the cooling is implemented and whether they restrict TDP even more by preventing the APU from reaching its full potential/performance), but they still seem to be charging ridiculous prices.

 

Before the Ryzen + Vega solution they all had underpowered ULV Intel CPU's, a few with a lowest end dGPU from Maxwell era.

HP / Dell / Sony / Samsung / LG have sold them in the $2k++ range or more base configuration, so offering a much better performing Ryzen + Vega for under $1k is a big deal - very reasonably priced for the segment

 

I suspect these models are selling on different types of consumer expectation about what they're getting. Cost to performance is not necessarily everyone's top (or even close to top) priority. If something seems to have a price that doesn't match its value to you, you are likely not the intended buyer.