New AMD CPU's rumored summer 2019

[Shakadam]

We are also only looking at the first iteration of 7nm Navi. It looks like Nvidia put all it's cards on the table all ready, when you think about it. Launching the 2080, 2080ti AND previewing Titan RX before the end of this year. The only place they will really go is backwards, maybe with 2050 or whatever. Meanwhile, Navi will be producing and iterating upward. 7nm is WICKED NEW tech, in terms of it's emergence. If they can get a GPU to market that hits Nvidia's top 3 flagship cards that fast.. I would expect and/or hope that the follow-up would push toward going head to head with 2080ti.

More important than just performance competition.. If AMD can get even within 10% or so of a 2080 or ti.. but at a 35% or more reduced pricetag, It would be a huge setback for Nvidia. I think people, even enthusiasts would be unable to ignore the value proposition there. 1400 for a 2080ti? or 800 for something within 10 or 12% performance of that? There is no math there, all but the top 3 or 5% of gamers/enthusiasts would readily flip to that. Especially as support for legacy performers like the 980 cards starts to go away, and GTX cards go to the wayside... Navi would, if launched in the correct windows at each generation, would have little issue pulling team green players to their camp.

Unfortunately you're ignoring the issue of mind-share, and yes it's a very real thing when comparing AMD to Nvidia.

For clueless people graphics cards = Nvidia. There is no one else.

Historically Nvidia has always outsold AMD even when Nvidia's product were worse in every way. The closest AMD (ATI back then) has ever gotten was back in the Radeon 9700/9800 vs Geforce FX days. The Radeon 9700 and 9800 were far superior products to anything Nvidia could offer at the time, with performance 2 or even 3 times better at a lower cost and much less power draw. Yet Nvidia still sold more Geforce FX products than ATI sold Radeon products during that time. There are several more examples of the same thing happening, like Radeon 7970 vs GTX 680, Radeon 290x vs GTX 780, and even today we have GTX 1050 and 1050TI vastly outselling RX470 and RX570 even though they're basically the same price and RX470/570 have much better performance.

AMD would need several years in a row with products beating Nvidia's products at every point; price, performance, and power draw, before "ordinary" people would possibly wake up to the idea that there is more than just 1 GPU manufacturer.

[Saphyron]

Unfortunately you're ignoring the issue of mind-share, and yes it's a very real thing when comparing AMD to Nvidia.

For clueless people graphics cards = Nvidia. There is no one else.

Historically Nvidia has always outsold AMD even when Nvidia's product were worse in every way. The closest AMD (ATI back then) has ever gotten was back in the Radeon 9700/9800 vs Geforce FX days. The Radeon 9700 and 9800 were far superior products to anything Nvidia could offer at the time, with performance 2 or even 3 times better at a lower cost and much less power draw. Yet Nvidia still sold more Geforce FX products than ATI sold Radeon products during that time. There are several more examples of the same thing happening, like Radeon 7970 vs GTX 680, Radeon 290x vs GTX 780, and even today we have GTX 1050 and 1050TI vastly outselling RX470 and RX570 even though they're basically the same price and RX470/570 have much better performance.

AMD would need several years in a row with products beating Nvidia's products at every point; price, performance, and power draw, before "ordinary" people would possibly wake up to the idea that there is more than just 1 GPU manufacturer.

You mean 1060? Cause the 1050 + ti is insanely cheaper than 470 and 570 but also much worse.

Currently prices in my place and performance. We will set 1050 as index 100 to measure up. (rx 480 out of stock everywhere) performance based on average fps on user benchmark game fps.

GPU	Price	Index	index/price
1050	168$	100	0,60
1050 ti	213$	112	0,53
RX 470	228$	130	0,57
1060 3GB	281$	146	0,52
RX 570	255$	136	0,53
RX 480	350$	154	0,44
1060 6GB	348$	165	0,47
RX 580	300$	159	0,53

At least when you look at this it seems the 470 is a markup over 1050 + ti.
the 570 competes with the 1060 3GB
and the 480+580 competes with the 1060 6GB both in price and performance.

Everything else you say I totally agree with.
I am one of those that say okay here is my budget, what are the best parts I can get for that budget.

In regards to the topic. I would say all of us have to wait until CES. But I really hope this is true because it can only become better for us the consumer.

[moremana]

In Cinebench single core 9900K@4GHz is 4% ahead of 2700X@4GHz. So yes there is a difference, but at the same time AMD is claiming Zen 2 has 13% IPC increase over Zen+. On what workloads that is still a bit unclear, but overall it should make AMD pass Intel in IPC.

I will give you that but synthetic benchmarks aren't real world performance. There is a reason YTers have jumped of the Ryzen train and went back to Intel.

[Evildeffy]

You mean 1060? Cause the 1050 + ti is insanely cheaper than 470 and 570 but also much worse.

Currently prices in my place and performance. We will set 1050 as index 100 to measure up. (rx 480 out of stock everywhere) performance based on average fps on user benchmark game fps.

GPU	Price	Index	index/price
1050	168$	100	0,60
1050 ti	213$	112	0,53
RX 470	228$	130	0,57
1060 3GB	281$	146	0,52
RX 570	255$	136	0,53
RX 480	350$	154	0,44
1060 6GB	348$	165	0,47
RX 580	300$	159	0,53

At least when you look at this it seems the 470 is a markup over 1050 + ti.
the 570 competes with the 1060 3GB
and the 480+580 competes with the 1060 6GB both in price and performance.

Everything else you say I totally agree with.
I am one of those that say okay here is my budget, what are the best parts I can get for that budget.

In regards to the topic. I would say all of us have to wait until CES. But I really hope this is true because it can only become better for us the consumer.

RX 570 prices:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...=-1&isNodeId=1

GTX 1050 Ti prices:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...=-1&isNodeId=1

Not sure where you get your prices from, ignoring the outliers the RX 570 is currently cheaper and faster.
Almost all of them on your list are outdated.

[Shakadam]

You mean 1060? Cause the 1050 + ti is insanely cheaper than 470 and 570 but also much worse.

Currently prices in my place and performance. We will set 1050 as index 100 to measure up. (rx 480 out of stock everywhere) performance based on average fps on user benchmark game fps.

GPU	Price	Index	index/price
1050	168$	100	0,60
1050 ti	213$	112	0,53
RX 470	228$	130	0,57
1060 3GB	281$	146	0,52
RX 570	255$	136	0,53
RX 480	350$	154	0,44
1060 6GB	348$	165	0,47
RX 580	300$	159	0,53

At least when you look at this it seems the 470 is a markup over 1050 + ti.
the 570 competes with the 1060 3GB
and the 480+580 competes with the 1060 6GB both in price and performance.

Everything else you say I totally agree with.
I am one of those that say okay here is my budget, what are the best parts I can get for that budget.

In regards to the topic. I would say all of us have to wait until CES. But I really hope this is true because it can only become better for us the consumer.

Regional pricing may ofc be different but in Europe the 1050 starts at 125€, 1050TI and RX570 both start at 150€.

[mrgreenthump]

I will give you that but synthetic benchmarks aren't real world performance. There is a reason YTers have jumped of the Ryzen train and went back to Intel.

That reason is that 9900K and 8700K before that, clock around 20% higher while overclocked. Currently they just outperform Ryzen 1/2 quite heavily in pretty much everything.

Plus if they use Adobe Premiere not only is Premiere core speed dependant, but it utilizes Quick Sync, which speeds up video encoding quite a lot. It just makes more sense to run on them if you main job is video creation. And it probably isn't going to change with Ryzen 3.

[bowchikabow]

That reason is that 9900K and 8700K before that, clock around 20% higher while overclocked. Currently they just outperform Ryzen 1/2 quite heavily in pretty much everything.

Plus if they use Adobe Premiere not only is Premiere core speed dependant, but it utilizes Quick Sync, which speeds up video encoding quite a lot. It just makes more sense to run on them if you main job is video creation. And it probably isn't going to change with Ryzen 3.

Don't forget that 85% of software is "optimized" for intel. As programs have started including AMD optimization, that fluff lead is fading, and fast.

[Saphyron]

RX 570 prices:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...=-1&isNodeId=1

GTX 1050 Ti prices:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...=-1&isNodeId=1

Not sure where you get your prices from, ignoring the outliers the RX 570 is currently cheaper and faster.
Almost all of them on your list are outdated.

The prices I have is the cheapest price for gigabyte cards in my country. Choose gigabyte since they make both amd and nvidia.

- - - Updated - - -

Regional pricing may ofc be different but in Europe the 1050 starts at 125€, 1050TI and RX570 both start at 150€.

Denmark is quite more expensive than most other countries, I choose the cheapest prices for gigabyte cards.

For the 480 since it is out of stock everywhere i choose what my roomie paid for his a while back.

[Illiterate]

The prices I have is the cheapest price for gigabyte cards in my country. Choose gigabyte since they make both amd and nvidia.

- - - Updated - - -


Denmark is quite more expensive than most other countries, I choose the cheapest prices for gigabyte cards.

For the 480 since it is out of stock everywhere i choose what my roomie paid for his a while back.

Might as well put everything in US prices since the US is the center of the world after all.

[Evildeffy]

The prices I have is the cheapest price for gigabyte cards in my country. Choose gigabyte since they make both amd and nvidia.

Then don't use USD but EUR or DKK, cannot translate price from Europe to US, just doesn't work, we'll never get US prices.
Also:
https://www.pricerunner.dk/results?q=rx%20570 <-- RX 570
https://www.pricerunner.dk/results?q=gtx%201050%20ti <-- GTX 1050 Ti

The GTX 1050 Ti is getting butchered here even in Denmark.

Denmark is quite more expensive than most other countries, I choose the cheapest prices for gigabyte cards.

For the 480 since it is out of stock everywhere i choose what my roomie paid for his a while back.

Luckily since you're from Denmark you don't HAVE to order from Denmark itself... Mindfactory.de is a better choice f.ex.
Also the RX 480 shouldn't be available in stores anymore so you have to search for RX 580 since that's it's direct successor.

Here's a Dutch list of RX 580's: Click this link for the list, ignore the language, just prices.
Here's a Dutch list of GTX 1060's (6GB): Click this link for the list, ignore the language, just prices.

From both of these lists ... it sucks that DK is backwards but you easily have other options to order from luckily which will not be stopped by taxes/customs from EU countries to DK.

[Life-Binder]

newegg is only relevant for muricans

plenty of countries where AMD GPUs cost the same or even more than Nvidia equivalents (or only slightly cheaper at best)


so it all depends where you live

[moremana]

That reason is that 9900K and 8700K before that, clock around 20% higher while overclocked. Currently they just outperform Ryzen 1/2 quite heavily in pretty much everything.

Plus if they use Adobe Premiere not only is Premiere core speed dependant, but it utilizes Quick Sync, which speeds up video encoding quite a lot. It just makes more sense to run on them if you main job is video creation. And it probably isn't going to change with Ryzen 3.

I'll just leave this here.

[Saphyron]

From both of these lists ... it sucks that DK is backwards but you easily have other options to order from luckily which will not be stopped by taxes/customs from EU countries to DK.

True though often shipping from either Germany or Holland + the hardware more often than not becomes more expensive than Danish prices.
In regards to pricerunner, it confirms what I wrote above. There is just 1 outlier and that is because it's 50% off right now as part of a sale.

snip

EDIT: Also I converted it to US$ to make it easier on the americans so they don't have to figure out what the conversation rate are between US$ & DKK

But this thread is not really to discuss prices on GPU's in Denmark. The only reason I brought it up was in response to what shakadam wrote.

Anyone know exactly when CES is going to happen and if they have an online stream, I only know its going to happen in January 2019, as per some of the sources linked in OP.

[xacid]

Anyone know exactly when CES is going to happen and if they have an online stream, I only know its going to happen in January 2019, as per some of the sources linked in OP.

CES is going to happen Tuesday, January 8 and ends on Friday, January 11

[Naiattavain]

im really amazed at how nice the AMD cpus are.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll just leave this here.

you'l want to invest into the best possible cooling solution for the 5 ghrz overclock. i think the cpus stock clocking is just fast enough to play games. but yea watch your temps if you can avoid over heating do so. to build your self a decent computer you'll be spending 5k.

[mrgreenthump]

I'll just leave this here.

You weren't the first one. Also I don't know how that video has anything to do with the thing you quoted. But I'll quote myself.

It's fun that he references the video from AdoredTV, but clearly hasn't watched it when he talks about the TDP numbers. In short it's all plausible.

His point on 3080 pricing seems fairly solid, but the counterargument is that at 20% lower price than 2070, they simply wouldn't sell any of them due to mindshare, even at 50% price I don't see how they would sell 1 to 1 with 2070. Although I do think 250 is too low, I'd expect 300-325 as the final price.

The most solid point is the no tech day argument, usually that thing should've been announced by now, it's a month till CES and no word on a tech day. Then again it's what AMD has did in the past and they didn't do it for Threadripper as he himself said, so who knows.

He brings up valid points, but there are counterarguments to be made against them. Pricing issue he brings is real, those probably are not the final prices. But it's also silly to think that companies don't attack pricing to products during development to have them at certain pricing brackets. One could speculate if AMD did such thing here, that even they were surpriced by the performance of 7nm and chiplet design.

They could easily increase the pricing for the final products and enthusiast market will still buy them, but will the consumer. $400 for a 12c/24t CPU would sell bonkers with enthusiasts, but put that same CPU to $300 and it will destroy everything. People will buy them even if they don't need em. Hell I would buy one and I can't even utilize all of my 8 cores atm when working.

The same happened with the Ryzen launch btw. We had 4c/8t at consumer platforms, nobody thought we would get a $1k CPU at $329, but we did. And it worked, people bought AMD for the first time in like half a decade, because it was so much better than anything before in everything(but gaming). The only downside of Zen was that it couldn't clock higher, due to AMD having access to inferior process node compared to Intel(by far) and now the tables have turned. TSMC 7nm was an answer to Intel 10nm, but Intel 10nm is still nowhere to be seen. It was supposed to be in mass production in 2H 2016. Last we heard mass production should be start late 2019. And just few days ago they announced that EUV 7nm was back on track, meaning they won't even use the 10nm process for more than a year, as their EUV was originally slated for mid to late 2020 mass production.

So AMD has a superior process node in their hands right now, they arguably have the superior uArch(at least when it comes to cost) and they got the consoles to fall back on every something would have gone wrong during development. Consoles are going to need millions of the Zen 2 chiplets, so they can produce as much as they want without risk currently. The chip is small and even the defective ones can be used to create yield of high 90s even with a new process node.

[Amalaric]

Will the Ryzen 3700X be overclockable?

I'm not exactly sure how AMD does it these days and no one and I mean no one really needs sixteen cores for PC gaming. (The 3700X is 12-core)

And CES is in January 8-11 so most of these new CPUs will be available real soon.

[mrgreenthump]

Will the Ryzen 3700X be overclockable?

I'm not exactly sure how AMD does it these days

If 2700x is anything to go by, they'll use XFR again. XFR works much like GPU boost works on AMD/Nvidia and On 2700x you barely got any overclocking headroom left after XFR, infact it was better to overclock the bus speed and leave XFR on rather than do all core overclocking. But that was because it was really the limit of the process node and there was no way around it. We don't know yet where the limits of TSMC HPC 7nm is, but it should be above 5GHz.

I mean no one really needs sixteen cores for PC gaming.

For now. Next gen consoles may change that but those are still over a year away. And even then it's doubtful you could do it with high clocking 8 core. But much like 8 cores now, with 12 core you should be able to multitask while gaming even with the most demanding games.

[Vash The Stampede]

I'm not exactly sure how AMD does it these days and no one and I mean no one really needs sixteen cores for PC gaming. (The 3700X is 12-core)

My belief is that AMD will use the CPU to do ray-tracing in games, unlike Nvidia who uses an RTX core. Makes sense since Ray-Tracing can scale linearly with CPU cores unlike current games where how many CPU cores used depends on how the game was coded. That is just my belief where I have nothing to back this up with, but it makes sense since Nvidia's RTX has been extremely limited to what the RTX core can do despite taking up 1/4 of the GPU chip die and 50% if you include the AI core.

[dadev]

My belief is that AMD will use the CPU to do ray-tracing in games, unlike Nvidia who uses an RTX core. Makes sense since Ray-Tracing can scale linearly with CPU cores unlike current games where how many CPU cores used depends on how the game was coded. That is just my belief where I have nothing to back this up with, but it makes sense since Nvidia's RTX has been extremely limited to what the RTX core can do despite taking up 1/4 of the GPU chip die and 50% if you include the AI core.

No, transfer latency alone makes this infeasible. Other than that even doubling the amount of cores will not bridge the current gap of performance, which is closer to x10.
What do you mean by limited? All previous compute based architectures achieved at best 1/10 of performance at double chip area. So far this looks like a remarkable success and nearly a revolution.