Thoughts on AMD Ryzen CPU SKUs

[WYP]

Let's have a look at AMD Ryzen's recently leaked SKUs, what is the difference between X and non-X models and what differentiates high-end SKUs from low-end SKUs.



Read more on AMD's Ryzen CPUs.

 

[Daiyus]

Sounds reasonable. In fact I kind of hope it's right; it would mean those of us with overclocking know-how can buy a cheaper SKU and do it manually anyway.

 

[Greenback]

So the x would probably be much like their black editions which were normally very good for overclocking

 

[SeekaX]

R7 1700 seems interesting, a shame we are going to get shafted on the price in EU.
Well, i guess it's better to wait for the revised version next year anyways.

 

[timothymccann89]

It does make me wonder what the point of the in-between non-x CPUs is. Why would anyone buy an R7 1800, when an R7 1700X will boost higher than it?

 

[AngryGoldfish]

I have no idea how effective this clock regulating technology is going to be. It's interesting to know what the 'X' might stand for, but it's still up in the air as to whether it's worth the price hike.

 

[g0ggles1994]

I have no idea how effective this clock regulating technology is going to be. It's interesting to know what the 'X' might stand for, but it's still up in the air as to whether it's worth the price hike.

That's what I thought considering the 1700 and 1700X have a £60 price gap. I hope it is more than just auto OC and 100MHz because while auto OC is a very nice feature, I would honestly disable it because I'd expect constantly OCing and UCing wouldn't fare well for the motherboard for prolonged periods

 

[WYP]

That's what I thought considering the 1700 and 1700X have a £60 price gap. I hope it is more than just auto OC and 100MHz because while auto OC is a very nice feature, I would honestly disable it because I'd expect constantly OCing and UCing wouldn't fare well for the motherboard for prolonged periods

Consider it in a different way. GPUs use different clock speeds depending on the load/ temperature, power draw and other factors. AMD are simply implementing the same thing on the CPU side, giving the hardware a chance to run faster in certain occasions.

The CPUs will have strict power and voltage limits to ensure that the hardware will last, this will never replace proper overclocking.

 

[SeekaX]

AMD has charged quite a bit of money for overclocked CPUs before (fx 9590). If it turns out to be the same situation, just buy the cheaper one and let them make a bit of money off people who can't be bothered to do it themselves.

 

[AlienALX]

I have no idea how effective this clock regulating technology is going to be. It's interesting to know what the 'X' might stand for, but it's still up in the air as to whether it's worth the price hike.

In the past X versions were never worth the money. Apart from the P4 Extreme, which was a Xeon in disguise.

It's always been cheaper to buy the lower end part and overclock it.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

In the past X versions were never worth the money. Apart from the P4 Extreme, which was a Xeon in disguise.

It's always been cheaper to buy the lower end part and overclock it.

I find it hard to believe that such a price difference will be allocated to purely one feature that could be done manually.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Also, what isn't clear and could pose a problem is the TDP of the 'non-X' derivatives. They have a 65w TDP while the 'X' variants have a 65w TDP. That, along with binning, might translate to significantly higher clock speeds. It may not be that you can just buy the cheaper one and overclock it.

 

[NeverBackDown]

Also, what isn't clear and could pose a problem is the TDP of the 'non-X' derivatives. They have a 65w TDP while the 'X' variants have a 65w TDP. That, along with binning, might translate to significantly higher clock speeds. It may not be that you can just buy the cheaper one and overclock it.

It's not confirmed yet. So it could and probably will change. Some could be binned for efficiency and others for performance. So with the new XFR, certain ones may prefer lower volts and others higher for.. well more performance
Still, 65watts for an 8c 16t CPU is insane. Intel has been stuck at 140watt for a long time

 

[AlienALX]

I find it hard to believe that such a price difference will be allocated to purely one feature that could be done manually.

Really dude?

Let's put it this way, many people have absolutely no idea whatsoever how to overclock their CPU.

Let's face it, unless you know your way around a bios it can be terribly, terribly daunting. In fact, I would hazard a guess and say that the main bread and butter of any company that makes CPUs would be their budget models. Now with Intel over the years they pretty much totally locked out overclockers. Then they realised that they could disable any way of force clocking via the BCLK and turned it into a cash cow (K series CPUs).

Whilst there are guides around the internet it is getting harder to find them because there are just so many different boards out there now.

I will be honest, I have only ever overclocked a few of my CPUs. I did overclock my I7 950 but it was as hot AF and in the end I just rolled it back to stock. I overclocked my 3970x and a year later the board died so I am quite hesitant now to overclock my 5820k because I can not be sure that if I do and it ages the board and it dies I can not find a replacement. Manus are moving on straight away these days, it's not like something like socket 775 where you could get boards for years.

Again, that is down to Intel.. Any way, TL;DR there are a few reasons why people are hesistant to overclock. It also requires many hours of studying and research and like I said, knowing your way around the bios. And most people these days don't know their ahole from their elbow. Why should they? you simply slot it all together and press the power button.

So yeah, basically if AMD are saying that you can have a chip that totally overclocks itself (and you therefore know it's all warrantied etc) then hey, if you got the cash right? Look how many K series CPUs Intel sold with the promise of overclocking.

I've said this a couple of times over the past few weeks but the most expensive parts are never worth buying. Not if you know "the crack" and know how to squeeze a cheaper part harder.

Example, Nvidia. Up until recently the top card was always poor value, because for £100 less you could buy say a GTX 970 and overclock it to perform like the 980. It's only with the 10 series they have realised they've been shooting themselves in the foot and stamped it out. Now there is a marked difference in performance and you will never get the 1070 to perform anything like the 1080 no matter how hard you try.

Plus then you got the willy wavers eh? 'cause let's face it there is a HUGE market in making some guy feel bigger and better than some one else. Especially because he can then visit a forum and wave his phallus in the air.

Sorry to reiterate it again, but the enthusiast part is never the most expensive. Just like we saw with the FX chips the one to have was the 8320. Simply because it was the same as the rest, you just needed to overclock it yourself and you would pretty much have the most expensive CPU AMD sold.

Going back to the X series? look at the 3960x, 4960x, 5960x. Look at the price - nearly a grand. Same goes for that new 10 core thing. Do they sell? you bet your backside lol.

Having said all of that? if I had the cash to buy something that was going to make my life easier and do the dirty work for me I would buy it. Especially if I had the cash.

 

[Excalabur50]

All that anyone really needs to remember there is no right or wrong with PC parts or whether you overclock or don't, if it's cheaper or expensive, if it is right for you and what you need to achieve then that in the end is all that matters

 

[Kleptobot]

I considered the 1090T to be an enthusiast part. At launch it was the most expensive consumer CPU that amd had. Mind you that's going back a few years now

 

[WYP]

I considered the 1090T to be an enthusiast part. At launch it was the most expensive consumer CPU that amd had. Mind you that's going back a few years now

I loved my 1090T, was a great CPU. Best CPU I have ever owned. So much fun to overclock etc.

So much random stuff with the phenoms, with both NorthBridge and core overclocking. with both base clock and multiplier adjustments loved it.

 

[AlienALX]

I considered the 1090T to be an enthusiast part. At launch it was the most expensive consumer CPU that amd had. Mind you that's going back a few years now

It was affordable though. The 1055T was the one most people bought though because it was cheaper and with a decent board and ram could do 3.7+ What helped with those CPUs was the fact AMD were behind and the boards were never that expensive. IIRC a top end board for AM2+ was about £100 then.

But yeah, hardly an extreme edition or anything with that sort of moniker

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Look how many K series CPUs Intel sold with the promise of overclocking.

But again, until I see how this internal overclocking works the price increase seems a little bit much. I'm saying this because it suggests to me there are other factors contributing to the higher price. The 8c/16t CPU supposedly has four iterations. I could understand the automatic overclocking premise better if there were only two CPU's available, but not when there are four. Are there going to be four slightly different clocks for the exact same CPU? It suggests to me there is something more than that. I understand your point. I just find it somewhat hard to believe that we'll be able to buy AMD's flagship for €390. If that's the case the initial rumour of $350 was very accurate. $350 is €390 when you factor in the strength of the USD, the weakness of the EURO, and the VAT of Spain which I think is where the retail who leaked the information is based.

I've said this a couple of times over the past few weeks but the most expensive parts are never worth buying. Not if you know "the crack" and know how to squeeze a cheaper part harder.

Example, Nvidia. Up until recently the top card was always poor value, because for £100 less you could buy say a GTX 970 and overclock it to perform like the 980. It's only with the 10 series they have realised they've been shooting themselves in the foot and stamped it out. Now there is a marked difference in performance and you will never get the 1070 to perform anything like the 1080 no matter how hard you try.

Plus then you got the willy wavers eh? 'cause let's face it there is a HUGE market in making some guy feel bigger and better than some one else. Especially because he can then visit a forum and wave his phallus in the air.

Sorry to reiterate it again, but the enthusiast part is never the most expensive. Just like we saw with the FX chips the one to have was the 8320. Simply because it was the same as the rest, you just needed to overclock it yourself and you would pretty much have the most expensive CPU AMD sold.

Going back to the X series? look at the 3960x, 4960x, 5960x. Look at the price - nearly a grand. Same goes for that new 10 core thing. Do they sell? you bet your backside lol.

Having said all of that? if I had the cash to buy something that was going to make my life easier and do the dirty work for me I would buy it. Especially if I had the cash.

While the 5930K was very popular for its additional PCI-e lanes, the 5820K could easily be overclocked to match it.


As a side note, while I very much appreciate your comment, can I please ask that you stop calling me dude. I don't want to sound like a whiney bitch, but it comes across as more patronising and condescending than friendly. I don't know how others feel about it, but I always cringe when I see it whether it's directed at me or someone else. You're entitled to post what you like; I'm just asking it as a favour.

 

[NeverBackDown]

But again, until I see how this internal overclocking works the price increase seems a little bit much. I'm saying this because it suggests to me there are other factors contributing to the higher price. The 8c/16t CPU supposedly has four iterations. I could understand the automatic overclocking premise better if there were only two CPU's available, but not when there are four. Are there going to be four slightly different clocks for the exact same CPU? It suggests to me there is something more than that. I understand your point. I just find it somewhat hard to believe that we'll be able to buy AMD's flagship for €390. If that's the case the initial rumour of $350 was very accurate. $350 is €390 when you factor in the strength of the USD, the weakness of the EURO, and the VAT of Spain which I think is where the retail who leaked the information is based.

I think you are over thinking this waaaay to much