Christ yes. Even more so considering they've been the clear cut best option for ages.
Since I already have a 6700k, I won't be getting a new chip for another 3 years or so. Will be fun to see what's going on around then!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AMD Ryzen CPUs will launch by March 3
- Thread starter TC McQueen
- Start date
Christ yes. Even more so considering they've been the clear cut best option for ages.
Since I already have a 6700k, I won't be getting a new chip for another 3 years or so. Will be fun to see what's going on around then!
Microcenter has had those prices for a long time. Not a whole lot of companies sell chips at cost, microcenter can because they usually sell them bundled with motherboards and such.
There are people who just don't consider AMD because they think AMD is low quality/bad driver software/etc...
Slightly different situation. Intel has been the clear cut dominant processor for almost ten years now. People are stuck with them even when overpriced, but the athlon era taught us enthusiasts will buy AMD hard when they are competitive. Apple just has a cult following who buys anything with their name on it even when they have competition so they Jack up prices eternally.
My experience with ATI hardware was horrible. Ended up returning the video card. Very inconsistent framerates, all over the place. My friend had a AMD CPU build. He had all sorts of issues & bad performance. Later, even when AMD was ahead of Intel I bought Intel & paid extra to avoid the bullshit.
So yeah, I'm avoiding them unless they become the dominant power in microprocessors.
(It's not that I love Intel, but more that I'd never trust AMD)
cyen
Member
Well, the only cpu that died on me was a 2600k, never even knew anyone who had a dead cpu.
AMD has bap rep because of its past, and the perception is very hard to change even if now its better, they have been improving their GPU drivers in the last few years . One bad experience can take years and years to recover even if it was a single time.
It seems (and all signs point to it) that 2017 will be the ryse
of AMD in the CPU market, and at last that happens. We dont have any major improvements in CPU area since Sandy Bridge and we have to blame both intel and AMD on that.A mainstream 8 core CPU starting 329$ is pretty disruptive, and im happy that AMD finally done something revelant (again, all signs point it, bulldozer at the time was already with a red alert flag even before reviews came out) in a decade.
Well, I never had any problems with AMD CPUs.
I'd certainly consider Ryzen. In fact, depending on benchmark results, I might see if I can get work to by me an 8 core one for my desktop. The 1700 could be an incredibly cost-effective CPU for compiling stuff.
I have a boxed FX-60 in the storage room somewhere. I know I have others too, but I don't remember the order they released now.
Intel was too expensive at the time so I got through the Pentium 2/3 generation with an AMD K6-2, which served me faithfully until Pentium 4.
I had a Duron 800, Athlon 64 3000 and a Phenom II X3 720 (was hoping to unlock the 4th core but no dice) before going Intel.
Would strongly consider the R7 1700 if I didn't already have a 6700k
I really hope Ryzen doesn't disappoint, the CPU market needs a shake-up
Tallshortman
Member
The R7 series seems like it could be quite popular on the professional/business side.
I feel like AMD has the potential here to disrupt the market place. If they offer a greater product for the price it generally is on the consumer to tear themselves away from the mindshare Intel has, i feel that will hold AMD back more than anything. Just the purveying sense that intel is top dog and there's nothing that can be done to change that.
ThreePiMatt
Member
AMD was a great price-to-performance option during the Athlon XP, AMD64, and AMDx2 eras. The Phenom was the last AMD CPU I owned, but it seems like starting with the Intel Core2Duo and later Core i chips, Intel was just always the better choice. Really hope AMD does it with these chips just to shake things up. I'm really interested in seeing the difference between the 1700x and 1600x. A solid $130 price difference, but I wonder if the 1600x will have a slight bit more overclocking headroom which may make it a better gaming option since the additional cores/threads probably won't make much of a gaming impact.
Dictator93
Member
Amazing @ those intel price cuts.
This is so great. Go AMD go!
This is so great. Go AMD go!
CarbonFire
Member
It's Microcenter, those are NOT Intel cuts. Or if they are, they are small cuts on top of the sweet deals Microcenter ALWAYS has on Intel CPUs. Sadly a misinformed news story is leading to a lot of misinformation.....I guess par for the course with wccftech.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
FX-60 was the last time AMD was king. After that Intel dropped Conroe and never looked back, and Phenom ended up being a huge letdown.
RenegadeXV8
Banned
I had AMD systems for 7-8 years, starting with an Athlon XP 2600+, then the Athlon 64 3500+ and finally the Phenom II X3 720.
Currently have a 4770K, but will upgrade to whatever is the best price/performance in an 8-core 16-thread CPU between Zen+ and Coffee Lake next year.
Currently have a 4770K, but will upgrade to whatever is the best price/performance in an 8-core 16-thread CPU between Zen+ and Coffee Lake next year.
I had been using AMD since my first 486 PC until Athlon 64x2, best value and performance.
But then Intel's Core flipped the table and made every other x86 competitor irrelevant, SAD!
michaelius
Banned
Nope - you don't need to use arguments that transcend logic and reality when you are buying best cpu on the market.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Intel has a very vulnerable position. The only reason people bought Intel was because for nearly a decade AMD wasn't even remotely performance competitive. But Intel has been perceived over the past 5 or so years as charging too much for very incremental performance increases.
They are extremely susceptible to being dramatically upset by an upstart competitor. Their attempts at branching out beyond traditional x86 markets have mostly been met by failure and most customers aren't really upgrading to new computers anymore until their existing one breaks because the average computer has been way fast enough for browsing the Internet and doing Excel spreadsheets for many years now.
If Intel hasn't been secretly spending those yearly billions on R&D into what comes next after silicon semiconductors, they are going to be in very deep trouble if a resurgent AMD starts hammering their margins by dramatically undercutting their prices. They are a very bloated organization which has produced little in the way of new growth opportunities for a long time.
Mysterious Stranger
Member
I would get a ryzen but then I would have to get a new motherboard and ddr4 ram and it would cost $700. I'll wait for a sale.
But Competion is good and intel prices are falling which also is good!
But Competion is good and intel prices are falling which also is good!
NeOak
Member
That's true. DF brought up a point i had not thought about, which was that intel has been focusing on integrated graphics to the point where its just assumed for PC's to come with an inbuilt graphics solution..
But for gaming that's just wasted die space. I feel like for gaming AMD is making the right moves aiming specifically at that space
LelouchZero
Member
It begins. Paul has an unboxing video!
Paul's Hardware: RYZEN UNBOXING! Check out the R7 1800X Reviewer's Kit from AMD
Paul's Hardware: RYZEN UNBOXING! Check out the R7 1800X Reviewer's Kit from AMD
Wolf Akela
Member
My last AMD CPU was my AthlonXP 1700+ Tbred A.
I just realized that I actually stuck with my i3 2100 through two GPUs: 9600GT, HD 5850. Boy was it a bottle neck.
I think people might be underestimating the value of Intel brand. Ask any non tech person which of the two brands they recognize and you'll find more people saying Intel. Even when AMD stomped Intel back in the AthlonXP/P4 days, I've still seen non tech people saying AMD processors are "second class" or even "fake/poverty Intels".
I just realized that I actually stuck with my i3 2100 through two GPUs: 9600GT, HD 5850. Boy was it a bottle neck.
I think people might be underestimating the value of Intel brand. Ask any non tech person which of the two brands they recognize and you'll find more people saying Intel. Even when AMD stomped Intel back in the AthlonXP/P4 days, I've still seen non tech people saying AMD processors are "second class" or even "fake/poverty Intels".
sleepnaught
Member
When are reviewers allowed to post benchmarks?
ShadowFox08
Member
Who says AMD wanted a mobile equivalent? I assume they were expecting at least a hoem console support at least.
It feels intentional that they would release it on march 3rd, on switch's launch.. like a jab.
NeOak
Member
AMD doesn't have anything like the Tegra line. But then again, NVIDIA has lost money on it for years.
The Switch was their first big OEM sell I think
Other than that, I remember a few Samsung tablets with Tegra chips.
Tuesday I think
NeOak
Member
The Zune HD had the original Tegra APX2500. It was ok.
Tegra 2 was popular with phones at the time because it was one of the first dual core A9 ARM CPUs. But NVIDIA fucked it up by not hitting the original thermals and not including NEON to try to force people to use their propietary GPU based SIMD.
The Nexus 7 2012 had a Tegra 3, which had a shitty as fuck eMMC controller that degraded performance over time until the tablet was slower than time inside a black hole. Also, ran kinda hot. It was also used in the original Surface RT. Wasn't used at all in phones because Phone makes do not forgive nor forget when you can't hit the thermals you promised.
Everyone skipped the Tegra 4 because it was hot as fuck, but it was used in the Surface 2 (non-pro), and some did use it when they we able to get their thermals under control (AKA nvidia sold them for peanuts compared to Qualcomm's SoCs). Tegra 4i did get some use in some Tier 2 phones, but that was because NVIDIA was giving them away pretty much.
The Nexus 9 has a Tegra K1. It has been used in like, 4 tablets?
The X1 really has no OEM wins besides the Switch. Sure, it is used in the Pixel-C, but that is not exactly mass market.
RenegadeXV8
Banned
^ Yeah, been following mobile tech for a long time, and before the K1, anytime Tegra showed up in a mobile device it was always met with "uggghh why"
Has been unofficially confirmed for some time, though Asus and a 3-party reviewer have now more directly stated it on record:
Crosshair VI Hero Closer Look
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAZA6bgZh0o&t=1m53s
Note, this is *not* a standard feature on AM4 motherboards.
https://twitter.com/ASUS_ROG/status/835474436098834432
Crosshair VI Hero Closer Look
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAZA6bgZh0o&t=1m53s
Note, this is *not* a standard feature on AM4 motherboards.
https://twitter.com/ASUS_ROG/status/835474436098834432
To be fair, they improved tons on energy efficiency going from intel ix-2*** to ix-6/7***, so their main problem is the price.
Tallshortman
Member
Yep, they're a tech industry poster child of why monopolies are bad. They're making record profits but have been relatively treading water for years.
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
I dunno. I think they've rightly identified that performance/watt and integrated graphics are more important for consumer PCs than raw performance and "moar cores", as sad as it for me as a gamer to admit that.
But hey, I'm still glad that they'll finally have some competition.
TC McQueen
Member
Different geometry for the CPU and its mount and different sizing.
The Lone Courier
Member
http://wccftech.com/intel-amd-price-war-ryzen-processors/
Intel Core i7-6950X ($1599 US) $300 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-6900K ($999 US) $200 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-6850K ($549 US) $150 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-6800K ($359 US) $140 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-5820K ($319 US) $100 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-7700K ($299 US) $80 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-6700K ($259 US) $140 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-4790K ($279 US) $90 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-7700 ($289 US) $50 Price Cut
Intel Core i7-6700 (259 US) $90 Price Cut
Intel Core i5-7600K ($199 US) $70 Price Cut
Intel Core i5-6600K ($179 US) $$90 Price Cut
Intel Core i5-4690K ($189 US) $70 Price Cut
Intel Core i5-7500 ($189 US) $30 Price Cut
Intel Core i5-6500 ($179 US) $50 Price Cut
Intel Core i5-4590 ($159 US) $60 Price Cut
Intel Core i3-7350K ($159 US) $20 Price Cut
Intel Core i3-7100 ($114 US) $15 Price Cut
Intel Core i3-6100 ($109 US) $20 Price Cut
Intel G4400 ($49.99 US) $20 Price Cut
Intel G3258 ($49.99 US) $27 Price Cut
"Several CPUs also come with a further $30 savings promotion when bundled with a compatible motherboard."
http://www.microcenter.com/category/4294966995,4294964566/Intel-Processors
Finally. Hoping this will drive price drops even further.
NeOak
Member
Ayyy lmao
There wasn't a price cut. People who keep posting that are just incredibly ignorant of Microcenter's history (hint: the prices arn't new)
The really strange part about all this is that they've been actively trying to branch into other areas -- IoT, 5G, etc -- as well as diversifying through the Altera buyout, but their efforts barely made a dent because Intel lacks experience in these sectors compared to their competitors.
Nostremitus
Member
Or... They are a company launching a product in the last month of Q1 of their FY17. Literally the last month before it would have been Q2 FY17 and missed their projected launch window. Also, income tax season.
The same could also apply to Nintendo, but I'm not sure when their fiscal year starts...
To be fair, I hadn't even heard of Microcenter before people started posting their prices in this thread. Same seems to be true for a lot of people.
At this point I wish that the poster who linked to that wccftech articled would edit the post so you guys wouldn't need to comment on it every time someone else falls for it.
CreepingFear
Member
Microcenter sells CPU/Mobo combos as loss leaders to get you in store. I've seen a GPU at Microcenter for $100 more than what you could buy it for on Amazon/NewEgg. Be careful there.
I had my 1st AMD cpu back in 2005!!!
ShadowKingpin
Member
Does anyone know if ASUS motherboards are reliable? I have always stuck with ASrock, but the ASUS B350 Prime is looking amazing allowing RAM up to 3200 for $100.