The Sweet Spot CPU for AMD Ryzen

This chip seems like the definitive sweet spot of the new AMD line
> X marked, means it has at least some overclockability above others
check
> only $259, cheap enough to not feel remorse in any way
check
> 6/12, more cores than 99% of games can use that efficiently anyway
check
Only caveat I can see is that it might not overclock well.
we'll see.

i'm just gonna wait another paycheck and buy a 1700x or a 1800x, why not.

PS. The 4/8 seems to have some chances to replace it but maybe not. Though the price cut does seem enticing. It's kinda a tossup.

>being so poor you have to pick the best price/performance ratio

sad

just make some real money

I came to this conclusion on my own also

To be honest, giving $500 for a cpu feels kinda stupid. $400 and it's stretching it. If it can drop below that it's always a plus.

I'm broke and in Canada, so I'll probably settle for a R3 1100 that'll end up costing $200 CDN after tax. Fuck Canada.

@59171090

The 1200X might be better in that case. They seem to imply if they put an "X" they overclock better or something.

They all overclock, though. It just looks like a better binned chip.

Hello guys I'm just coming into this thread to tell you all that I came to the conclusion that the AMD Ryzen R5 1600X will be the definitive leader when it comes to price/performance ratio entirely on my own.

I am a gamer and it has everything that matters to me as a gamer. Gamers like me should consider the R5 1600X for its overclockability, its low price, and its large number of cores which future-proof it against further advancements in gaming.

Again guys, I'm a gamer and I came to these conclusions entirely on my own.

Greetz.

You mean the POOR spot?
This site is 18+ you know

Whats ur gamertag bro add me on Steam

I'm not even a gamer to be honest. I mainly do some heavy-duty desktop stuff. In general pure multithreading is a very rare need since almost nobody really just encodes HEVC 24/7.
6/12 seems way more than enough for almost everybody for the next 10-20 years.
Only question is overclockability.

...

$500 for a cpu is kinda stupid to be honest even if I can afford it. I can go $400 and feel good about it but anything below it is a plus. Since those 8/16s for an overclocker seem to start basically around $400 and but you can drop near $250 with 6/12, the 6/12 line seems like a sweet spot for Ryzen.

>R5 1400X
>matches core and thread count of most i7s sold
>199USD
>stock boost and base close to R7 1800X
>more TDP design per core than more expensive skus
the 1400X is going to be the new 2500K of the industry, on a good board this thing will likely overclock like a monster

xXx_1337_SN1PER_420_xXx

Why the fuck didn't they promote the 1400X first thing in their presentation? It's only $199 and 4/8. If it can even go NEAR the i7-7700K it's a major Blow to Intel.

the 1600x-1500 might very well be binned worse than the 1700, given the 4 core design grouping. I suspect the 6 cores are all 8 core rejects

Yeah why they fuck didn't they start their promotion with that? It seems like a lost opportunity BIG TIME. By promoting those $500 CPUs with 99 threds first they make most people see them as snobs or even failures.

if they released it now, there would be too many shortages
t. knower

they wanted to hit intel where it hurt the most first
business sales

>1400X is 200$
>not getting 1600X for 50$ more

Doubtful because they could funnel more production to them, so they wanted also more production on the 8/16 line.

>binned 8 core leftovers
I have more confidence in Ryzen SKUs that are groups of 4, but we'll wait for reviews

If that is the case and with AMDs history we might have 8c/16t for half the price.

the market share for the more expensive cpus is always lower so it makes sense to release it first

they might all be the same 8 core die, with the 6 core chip having one core per CCX disabled and the 4 core chip having two cores per CCX disabled

Do you think AMD users are going to be upset when those who switch to zen can still afford better computers than they can?

Everything under 8 cores is an 8 core reject.
They just disable the failed cores and sell it, like they've done since forever.

I forgot about that
>flip switch
suddenly phenom II x6
or
>flip literal switch
suddenly 6970 from a 6950

there's literally nothing wrong with this
it streamlines the production process

The 6c/12t parts do seem like the best value proposition. Basically giving more than a mainstream i7 but pricing it like an i5. Solid move on AMD's behalf.
I imagine the lower end Raven Ridge APUs will totally kill all i3s and locked i5s.

Pro SKUs are businesse oriented, not consumer parts.
You have no idea how AMD binned them.

>rejects
That's a complicated matter though in itself. Why would something be rejected. For example it might overclock great but only 1 of the cores out of 8 to be bad so even if you turn it into a 6/12 to still overclock great.

from what ive read non X have no XFR hence the X designation. They can still be manual oc though as they are all unlocked.

>and the 4 core chip having two cores per CCX disabled
all the leaks we've seen have shown that the 4 core models are 1/2 the cache size, but that would be cool to have such a huge pool for just 4 cores

Or the demand for the 6c is higher than they expected so they have to turn perfectly fine 8c into 6c.
Remember Phenom II days? Remember the first bach of RX 480 4gb?

added. accept request from *360_n0_scOp3z_360*

they want to get ryzen into commercial settings and get industry players talking about it amongst themselves. It's brand new and not insane priced so they know consumers will still buy. Margins are probably larger on the high end and they are raking in as much as possible on the quick.

>has to wait for another paycheck
lol git gud

Can ryzen make C++ compile faster?
I have an i5 3570k

>can Ryzen do parallel integer workloads?
It's its absolutely strongest workload, bar none.

Any news on delidding and lapping the chips?

if it gets to 5niggahurtz i'll get the r3 1100.

What do you think this is, Intel?

Compilation, encryption, compression/decompression, encoding/transcoding/decoding, VMs, any kind of strenuous network activity is where Zen is gonna shit even against competing Intel cores.

>Being a trustfund kiddy who doesn't understand the value of money
Don't you have a garbage can to light on fire to "smash capitalism / racism / fascism / boogeyman of the vogue"?

One of those doesn't belong.

It starts with a "c"

The sweet spot is 1700X
the 1600X is the "I'm broke but I still keep buying computer parts, what the fuck am I doing with my life" tier

APU's aren't soldered, maybe ryzen isn't either. we won't know for sure until NDA is up though.

The sweet spot is the R5 1300. Unlock the extra cores and OC it to get a R7 1800X for less than a third of the cost.

>anything from R5 is better binned than R7
I want this meme to end

...

they are probably laser cut.

>8 cores have ether one or two cores defective
>become 6 cores now
>of those 'six' cores, they are binned

>95W
>sweet Spot
Try again AMD

Their tri-cores being defective doesn't sound any better

Stop using "binned" since you don't have any fucking clue what it means.
In the first place "binned" means nothing without context, every CPU out there is binned, what's important is the BINNING TARGET, and you don't know if that's frequency or voltage, on top of that you don't even know how leaky is the chip.
Shut the fuck up niggers REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

this person gets it.
Binning is no indication of how well it will OC.
It just met its target and thats all it did.

Yields are so good they dont have many 4 and 6c chips in stock. Why disable 2 good cores when you can sell it as a 1700 at least? The demand is there. I'm they are close to, if they havent yet, sold out those 1 million initial R7s.

I dont think mobo makers have enough stock either for a full launch. Demand again is huge for what it is, why not sell the most expensive chips and mobos first for a quick infusion of cash?

They have 1 million units in stock? Holy fuck that's like somewhere around 4 billion in revenue for a single quarter.

>implying retarded trustfund kiddies don't "smash capitalism" with iPhone selfies

If you're too loony in the left if you hate capitalism what are you gonna like? Socialism? That's even worse for those rainbow haired freaks and ass fuckers.

That's why they wanted a "hard launch" instead of a paper launch. Instant money, instant hype, no reaction time for Intel.

Ryzen could have had a paper launch in December.

How much do you figure the margins are?
I hope they're at least over 45% for these chips.

Should be a lot higher, they're not big chips and yields are fantastic.

someone post that pic with the poor portorrican kid

If every chip sold at retail price directly from AMD, and every chip sold was an 1800X, at most it would be $500,000,000.
AMD doesn't sell things directly, they sell to retailers, and that MSRP includes margin for the retailer. Not every chips sold will be a 1800X either, most will likely be the 1700.
Point being that an initial volume of 1 million units is significantly less than half a billion USD in revenue for AMD. How the fuck you managed to figure this into 4 billion is beyond human comprehension.

An extra zero went in.

>I imagine the lower end Raven Ridge APUs will totally kill all i3s and locked i5s.
We'll have to wait and see. While I know the construction cores were a completely different beast, they cut the level three cache to help get the IGP I'm there. AMD may well end up having to do that again and we have no clue how that's going to impact IPC, clock rates or anything else.

It will be interesting. I have every intention of getting a top APU regardless, simply because they're more fun to overclock. We've had good enough hardware since the athlon 64 era, everything beyond that is just gravy.

That epic may-may was stupid when it was new and it's stupid now.
>Our new i7s are defective
>Don't you mean i5s?
>(trollface)

HEY LOOK AT ME IM GONNA BUY THIS 2000$ CPU EVEN THOUGH ITS OUTPERFORMED BY A 500$ CHIP DONT YOU WISH YOU WERE RICH LIKE ME?

I don't believe this sheet will be accurate.
I don't think they would have fixed prices half a year before the Ryzen 3 launch like this.

The 1700X was especially inaccurate. Leaks showed $382-$389 and it ended up being $399. That was off more than the others.
And clock speeds changed.

I am pretty sure the R5 1600X, which is actually going to be 3.6/4.0Ghz, will be $279-$299
And there will increase a 1500X at $259 which clock speeds between it and the 1500.

I'm pretty sure this is just more of a "this is a rough idea of SKUs we'll have", and R5 and R3 will change more than than R7 did.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if R3 is ONLY 4 cores, and there is no SMT disabled ones. There is really no reason that SMT would be disabled on these chips in significant quanities. They wouldn't be able to meet even 1% of the demand. I'm pretty sure the $129 1100 will be 4c/8t and just very low clocked.

click the number to reply newfag

Not that guy but the whole @ joke/meme is old now. Calling someone a newfag for that is pretty funny. Just here from Sup Forums, yeah?

@59172915
really made me think/10

I'll get the 4c/8t (probably 1400x) and upgrade to the 8c/16t when the Ryzen is more refined. No reason for me to get anything more than 8 threads.

They'll probably have SKUs later in the year with higher clocks or lower power. Process is always refined as time goes on.

AM4 is going to stick around for a while. The other guy can probably get a zen+ or zen++ CPU as a drop in replacement at some nebulous point in the future.

The best binned chips are selling first so the yields must be good.

what are the cache numbers? x17-18 4MB L3 lil bit more L3

fucking sad. 8 year old CPUs out there with more. what a shit decision. I guess we'll see the server line-up later on

Its 16MB of L3, you tard.

L3 can lick my balls