TR Forums

Hey y'all.
This is a leak from Jim at AdoredTV. I wouldn't usually trust everything he says, and indeed he has made some wrong calls in the past. However, he was pretty close with Rome and Turing.
What do you guys think? Is $99 for 6c/12t Ryzen 3, $229 for 8c/16t Ryzen 5 and $249 for RX 3080 with performance in the RTX 2070 ballpark sound too good to be true?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCdsTBsH-rI

yes

There's just a lot of "well it depends" going on, but I think overall it sounds too good to be true right up until it comes out and I'm (eventually) proven wrong.

AMD's not that stupid. It does price lower than Intel and NVIDIA, trying to gain market share, but no way is it going to sell a card for $350 that actually is competitive with the $500 NVIDIA model.

$350 is solidly GTX 1070 territory, not even GTX 1070 Ti ; either the new AMD is $350 and competes with GTX 1080 or it's more than $350 and compete with the RTX 2070.

That said, if it happens I'd be tempted despite not really needing to be all the while my Vega 56 is kinda fine still, but it doesn't reliably get to properly high FPS at high settings ... and I don't want to chuck another couple of hundred watts at it ...

No, it's still plausible.

CPU-side, they could, but they'd have to have a pretty good reason to. If they want to standardize on 8C dies everywhere and are expecting good yields (8C Zen2 will probably still be tiny in mm²), that might do it. If 7nm's high costs are focused more on creating masks and marginal costs are low, then having a separate 4C die could be a pretty bad value proposition.

GPU-side, that all lines up well. We're talking a two-node process jump, and Nvidia badly handicaps their perf/mm² anywhere they include RTX. Turing won't compete with Navi unless you really, really like ray tracing, but presumably Nvidia will have something on 7nm out in a similar timeframe.

I heard that they're bundling a pony with every card sold.

...don't feed the clickbait fake rumors.

16 CORES AT 5.1GHZ FOR FREE CONFIRMED!!!!

OMG THANK YOU AMD!!!

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-spe ... hz-on-am4/

Incidentally, since that's of course on an AM4 motherboard, I vote that we show "fairness" by limiting all 8 core AMD systems to a single channel of RAM in all TR reviews since one channel of RAM oughta be plenty for an 8 core CPU that supposedly has finally gotten Haswell-level AVX support.

RX 3080? Are you F-ing kidding me? First they ripped off Intel's numbering scheme, now they're doing it on the graphics side too. If this happens, I'll have lost some respect for AMD.

On the CPU stuff, if they can't improve IPC or clocks to match Intel, they'll have to increase core count. So if this rumor is true, that's telling.

I don't think AMD needs to undercut Intel drastically to continue gaining market share. It's certainly a diminishing return fight because of brand loyalty.

On the GPU side, AMD desperately needs a win. NVidia has carved out an enormous lead in performance and brand loyalty and they're charging accordingly for RTX. although Navi may be seen as a drastic disruptor to the $/perf status quo when it launches, Nvidia will still be the one laughing all the way to the bank since they'll have enjoyed many months of inflated margins and have room to lower their prices to reflect their position against Navi.

chuckula wrote:

16 CORES AT 5.1GHZ FOR FREE CONFIRMED!!!!

OMG THANK YOU AMD!!!

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-spe ... hz-on-am4/

Incidentally, since that's of course on an AM4 motherboard, I vote that we show "fairness" by limiting all 8 core AMD systems to a single channel of RAM in all TR reviews since one channel of RAM oughta be plenty for an 8 core CPU that supposedly has finally gotten Haswell-level AVX support.

Who me? I'm the most bullish on it in this thread by far so far, but I don't even know what you're responding to 2/3rds of the time. "It's still plausible" isn't a very strong statement.

The statement your proposal on RAM could reasonably counter would be something like "a 16 core / 2 channel CPU will not spend significantly more time waiting on memory than we're used to." Who is saying that? That's a serious question.

DPete27 wrote:

RX 3080? Are you F-ing kidding me? First they ripped off Intel's numbering scheme, now they're doing it on the graphics side too. If this happens, I'll have lost some respect for AMD.

Yeah, that's obnoxious.

Would be a shame if they copy Nvidia's numbering scheme. They had a perfectly good one before (7700, 7850/7870, 7950/7970 etc), and the Vega scheme of including the GPU codename was interesting. I'd rather see "Navi 20" than Radeon 3080.

The only price I believe -- for any product from any vendor -- is the one I see in my cart at e-tailer checkout.

chuckula wrote:

Incidentally, since that's of course on an AM4 motherboard, I vote that we show "fairness" by limiting all 8 core AMD systems to a single channel of RAM in all TR reviews since one channel of RAM oughta be plenty for an 8 core CPU that supposedly has finally gotten Haswell-level AVX support.

The snark is real.

Seriously though - nobody has ever contested that memory bandwidth is key for some software stacks. What, exactly, is the dig here?

jihadjoe wrote:

Would be a shame if they copy Nvidia's numbering scheme. They had a perfectly good one before (7700, 7850/7870, 7950/7970 etc), and the Vega scheme of including the GPU codename was interesting. I'd rather see "Navi 20" than Radeon 3080.

Yeah, though I still don't see why they couldn't have been more sensible and called the Vega generation RX 690(X) and then the Navi ones would be RX 7xx.

Plus, the Radeon 3080 scans as a bit too close for comfort (for me) to Radeon 3800 which I was quite used to seeing reported by software for my HD 3850 for a long while back when, and those things were a value proposition for poorer gamers at best, the top card launching behind NVIDIA's top 4 cards at the time... (8800 Ultra, 8800 GTX, 8800 GT, 8800 GTS 640 MB)

EDIT: hang on Watson - "performance in the RTX 2070 ballpark" means performance behind that offered by NVIDIA's top 5 cards now too (Titan RTX, RTX 2080 Ti, Titan V, RTX 2080, GTX 1080 Ti). It may even be that "in the ballpark" means what it usually would and performance is sub-2070 level, so the top RX 3000 card would actually be behind NVIDIA's top 6 cards including the RTX 2070 ... okay, it's $350

I'm not really frequent here, but felt like chiming in)

First, re Zen 2 - remember when the first leaks about the first Ryzen started coming in, we all were quite skeptical about it, saying no way AMD can deliver on what they promised and more? And in the end it turned out quite right. And here, I have no reason to not believe it is possible. I'm sure AMD engineers had enough time to find what stops them from going above 4.3Ghz and to find a solution. Also, I have a bit of a feeling that the 4.3Ghz barrier had also something to do with GloFo process. Maybe with TSMC things are a bit different? And the chiplet configuration really allows you to bin very aggressively, and this is why we see so many cores on low-end r3s and r5s - you don't need a fully functional 8-core die, you can get away with 6 defective cores and still put together a dirt-cheap 4-core 8-thread cpu that will wipe the floor with pentiums. Or, you take two less defective dies and voila, 6-core 12-thread.. or, you take one die and add a gpu next to it.. boom! Just damn genius. Zero waste. And then you have halo models, with best chips, with top frequencies. And I see no reason to doubt that 5.1hz single core turbo is achievable.
I am personally really interested in 3600G. But Q3 2019 is a long way away.

Speaking of Navi.. meh. By the time it comes out Nvidia will be prepping their next gen, so it will be similar to Vega launch but maybe a bit less hurtful for certain, already trained, butts. The low price tag already screams "look, i'm inferior but look how much cheaper I am". I'm sure it will be a great value proposition, but to challenge nVidia one needs to do better. And the naming? I dunno, sounds like a payback for RTX.

DPete27 wrote:

RX 3080? Are you F-ing kidding me? First they ripped off Intel's numbering scheme, now they're doing it on the graphics side too. If this happens, I'll have lost some respect for AMD.

Numbering schemes go back and fourth. NVidia did exactly the same thing when AMD's Radeon 9700 Pro was dominant, switching from the Geforce 4 Ti4600 to the Geforce 5800 Ultra

njoydesign wrote:

First, re Zen 2 - remember when the first leaks about the first Ryzen started coming in, we all were quite skeptical about it, saying no way AMD can deliver on what they promised and more? And in the end it turned out quite right. .

Remember 5 GHz on air? The folks going nuts over at /r/amd always seem to forget about that one.

https://wccftech.com/ryzen-overclocks-c ... air-tease/

I'm optimistic given the presentations I've seen so far for Rome.

chuckula wrote:

..AMD systems to a single channel of RAM.

Hell, I just wish that unbuffered ECC was hitting (much) higher frequencies.

EndlessWaves wrote:

DPete27 wrote:

RX 3080? Are you F-ing kidding me? First they ripped off Intel's numbering scheme, now they're doing it on the graphics side too. If this happens, I'll have lost some respect for AMD.

Numbering schemes go back and fourth. NVidia did exactly the same thing when AMD's Radeon 9700 Pro was dominant, switching from the Geforce 4 Ti4600 to the Geforce 5800 Ultra

At least it wasn't called the x800 ultra...

Even if the leaks are true, it may not be a problem for Nvidia, certainly not the high end, but even the mid range, as I just watched a video that claims the 2070 is overpriced and could be discounted to match amd. They're just gouging for rtx, and could easily drop prices against a competitive card.
https://youtu.be/o2fPWQQSdu4?list=PLMfD ... 91XDvkT95w

DoomGuy64 wrote:

Even if the leaks are true, it may not be a problem for Nvidia, certainly not the high end, but even the mid range, as I just watched a video that claims the 2070 is overpriced and could be discounted to match amd. They're just gouging for rtx, and could easily drop prices against a competitive card.
https://youtu.be/o2fPWQQSdu4?list=PLMfD ... 91XDvkT95w

Unless it's allowed its costs to balloon, NVIDIA has been gouging any time it could, forever.

Good business, I guess.

Here's another opinion from Extremetech that's not as enthusiastic: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/2 ... to-be-true

I suggest we have a fun round of BURN THE HEATHENS!! for not drinking our special koolaid.

It is far more likely that AMD is going to attempt to unify its Ryzen line-up with a single Zen2 chiplet (4c/6c/8c) + I/O chip (24 PCIe 3.0 lanes + dual-channel DDR4 due to AM4) + iGPU (probably little Vega) platform. They can finally address their primary strategic disadvantage to Intel in the OEM laptop/desktop market by making iGPUs ubiquitous. They are waiting for DDR5 and PCIe 4.0 to finalize before changing sockets which is went they probably set up the core count for their Ryzen line-up. Navi isn't going to used for first batch of Zen2-based Ryzens since most of the subpar stock is going end-up in consoles and other semi-intergrated contracts. AMD will probably throw Navi in a Zen2+ refresh and certainly will do it for Zen3-based Ryzens.

TSMC's 7nm process will allow AMD to close the clockspeed and power efficiency gap that Intel currently enjoys in the desktop/laptop markets which will hopefully attract OEM vendors.