Low-power Ryzen 7 2700E CPU appears on 3DMARK

Another processor has entered AMD's Ryzen 2nd Generation lineup.



Read more about AMD's low-power Ryzen 7 2700E processor.

Wonder what kind of market would need 8 cores at such a low wattage. The decreased wattage envelope is nice but it's still going to need a gpu which means it's overall power increase is still quite high. I think a 6 core APU would be perfect mix of CPU and GPU power. Wish they did something like that in the future.

Yeah, would have been nice if they'd put that Vega APU bit on all of their Ryzen CPUs. I mean ffs even Intel do that for the most part.

I know Intel didn't on higher end chips, but their "go to" CPUs that most people buy do. I think that is AMD's next hurdle tbh.

NeverBackDown said:

Wonder what kind of market would need 8 cores at such a low wattage. The decreased wattage envelope is nice but it's still going to need a gpu which means it's overall power increase is still quite high. I think a 6 core APU would be perfect mix of CPU and GPU power. Wish they did something like that in the future.

Click to expand...

Think of it this way, OEMs want to advertise having eight cores and don't want to spend too much on cooling and power.

As far as your 6-core APU thoughts go, It is likely that AMD will release higher core count products with Zen 2/Ryzen 3000 on 7nm. Rumours of 6-core CCX designs have been floating around for a while now. That would allow APUs to offer up to six cores.

AlienALX said:

Yeah, would have been nice if they'd put that Vega APU bit on all of their Ryzen CPUs. I mean ffs even Intel do that for the most part.

I know Intel didn't on higher end chips, but their "go to" CPUs that most people buy do. I think that is AMD's next hurdle tbh.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but Intel didn't do that this time last year. It all comes to die sizes and margins, why make an 8-core with a GPU that nobody will use? They would be inactive on all of those EPYC processors and pretty much consume power and die-space for no reason for the most part.

I think that AMD's next-gen Zen 2 processors will use six-core CCXs, upping APU core counts to six and big CPU core counts to 12. It seems like a logical way to use the extra die space (die space savings) offered by 7nm, aside from other core changed to increase IPC or increase clock speeds.

It is hard to see system builders who have more than 4-core processors not using dedicated graphics TBH. There are plenty of people who actively disable Intel's iGPU within their BIOS.

Well tbh? Sometimes when you need lots of cores you don't care about a GPU. More often than not I reckon.

They could at least make one and offer it as an option.

AlienALX said:

Well tbh? Sometimes when you need lots of cores you don't care about a GPU. More often than not I reckon.

They could at least make one and offer it as an option.

Click to expand...

TBH, with AMD's current market position the smart decision is to make the products that suit 9/10 people and keep their production/development costs low.

While an option would be nice, I don't think the feature tickbox is worth the development time, larger die sizes and reduced margins.

AlienALX said:

Well tbh? Sometimes when you need lots of cores you don't care about a GPU. More often than not I reckon.

They could at least make one and offer it as an option.

Click to expand...

What....? Think you've got it backwards there.

Those who need more than 4 cores are typically: Game devs / Photographers / Programmers / Software devs / Streamers (can be considered a profession now honestly) / Gamers (depending on how much they want to "future" proof themselves and intended gaming and other workloads).

That is just to name the ones I can think of at the moment. All of the professions above "should" be using a 6 core or higher CPU if they want to get the most of their workload done in the fastest way and they will almost all be using a dedicated GPU simply due to the sheer volume of items they are manipulating or modifying.

Whereas business people (like marketing / accounting / etc) typically are just fine with a strong 4 core CPU with the built in iGPU. They don't have any workloads that require the grunt dedicated GPUs offer.

I can see YouTubers who need to render videos while on the road at things like Computex getting use out of higher core count laptops, which this CPU seems geared towards.

Darkdayzzz said:

What....? Think you've got it backwards there.

Those who need more than 4 cores are typically: Game devs / Photographers / Programmers / Software devs / Streamers (can be considered a profession now honestly) / Gamers (depending on how much they want to "future" proof themselves and intended gaming and other workloads).

That is just to name the ones I can think of at the moment. All of the professions above "should" be using a 6 core or higher CPU if they want to get the most of their workload done in the fastest way and they will almost all be using a dedicated GPU simply due to the sheer volume of items they are manipulating or modifying.

Whereas business people (like marketing / accounting / etc) typically are just fine with a strong 4 core CPU with the built in iGPU. They don't have any workloads that require the grunt dedicated GPUs offer.

Click to expand...

Nope not got it backward at all. NAS, server, storage box etc. All of them need a GPU so you can see what you are doing, all benefit from more cores etc.

Remember, gamers don't "need" 8/16 yet. Not by a long shot. So why market low power many cored CPUs without a GPU onboard? It doesn't even really need to be anything special.

Oh yeah, if you are streaming or encoding movies (or editing) and benefit from more cores you don't need a great GPU either. Look at 90% of Apple machines. Crap GPU, but that doesn't matter too much.