Friday, January 6th 2017

AMD Ryzen 8 Core/16 Thread CPU ES Now Run at 3.6 GHz base, 3.9 GHz Boost

The folks at hardwareluxx managed to get some quality alone time with AMD's Ryzen demonstration boot at CES 2017, and it has to be said they used their time well. They managed to bring up Windows' System page, as well as its Device Manager, which seemingly confirmed that the Ryzen sample at use, though an engineering sample it was, was set at 3.6 GHz base clock with the capability to boost up to 3.9 GHz on a whim - up 200 MHz from the base clock speed of the sample used at AMD's New Horizon Event, where even at those speeds, the chip was shown beating an 8 core, 16 thread i7 6900K. You can see those clocks at the below screenshot, where "1D3601A2M88F3_39/36_N" (the code for the engineering sample Ryzen chip) makes it clear this is an F3 stepping processor, with the 39 referring to the boost clock, and the 36 referring to its base clock.

This goes right into AMD's claims of 3.4 GHz being the lowest frequency a Ryzen consumer processor would carry. It seems AMD is quickly galloping towards the finish line here, and as Lisa Su said at the New Horizon presentation, Ryzen chips can only improve until their promised launch, with an already rumored F4 stepping of the processor carrying a rounded-up, 4 GHz boost clock.

Source: Hardwareluxx.de
Add your own comment

48 Comments on AMD Ryzen 8 Core/16 Thread CPU ES Now Run at 3.6 GHz base, 3.9 GHz Boost

#1
chaosmassive
he/she should have smuggled usb stick contain aida or cpu z, fired up the benchmark and cover the screen with bag or something to avoid get kicked out from booth :D
Posted on Reply
#2
VulkanBros
Can´t wait till they launch the ZEN - my FX-9590 is soon going to retire :toast:
Posted on Reply
#3
Raevenlord
News Editor
chaosmassive said:
he/she should have smuggled usb stick contain aida or cpu z, fired up the benchmark and cover the screen with bag or something
That would put the taser team into hostile status, and maybe even prompt Adam Jensen to intervene ;)
Posted on Reply
#4
The Quim Reaper
Well unless AMD are releasing them close to their limits, it gives me hope that with decent cooling, at least 4.5Ghz is/should be within easy reach.
Posted on Reply
#5
prtskg
Highlighting F4 stepping news would have been great too. BTW, this'll be some year.
Posted on Reply
#6
Raevenlord
News Editor
prtskg said:
Highlighting F4 stepping news would have been great too. BTW, this'll be some year.
I did =)

Raevenlord said:
This goes right into AMD's claims of 3.4 GHz being the lowest frequency a Ryzen consumer processor would carry. It seems AMD is quickly galloping towards the finish line here, and as Lisa Su said at the New Horizon presentation, Ryzen chips can only improve until their promised launch, with an already rumored F4 stepping of the processor carrying a rounded-up, 4 GHz boost clock.
Posted on Reply
#7
the54thvoid
When

Are

They

Going

To

Release

The

Damn

Thing

?
Posted on Reply
#8
YautjaLord
Typed a "hardwareluxx @ ces 2017" & "amd ryzen tested @ ces 2017" - no vids, used Google & YT search. Gave links in Russian & German. Same stuff as in this article, no slides tho. Will you guys be able to do hands-on on this stuff? Or are there photos of this @ your CES 2017 coverage?
Posted on Reply
#9
ssdpro
This info is a good sign. In the great journey of up and down leaks, this is a big up and if it holds, at a price under $550 US/EUR, we have a winner that feeds a niche market. If it is priced under $500, we have some real volume market disruption.
Posted on Reply
#10
mrthanhnguyen
And when they put a price tag of $999 on that Ryzen. Its still cheaper than 6900k though.
Posted on Reply
#11
FYFI13
ssdpro said:
This info is a good sign. In the great journey of up and down leaks, this is a big up and if it holds, at a price under $550 US/EUR, we have a winner that feeds a niche market. If it is priced under $500, we have some real volume market disruption.
Wasn't it meant to be something around 350USD?
Posted on Reply
#12
Dimi
mrthanhnguyen said:
And when they put a price tag of $999 on that Ryzen. Its still cheaper than 6900k though.
But who will buy it? People already complaining about pricing on 6800k & 6850k's or the 6600K and 6700K?

Too many people are expecting a sub 200-300 dollar 8C/16T cpu from AMD that will beat a 6900K. I think MANY will be disappointed again once again.

I'm certainly not going to jump on a CPU for 500+ dollar while my 4770K is still doing all it needs to do.

I also believe this only has 20 lanes? Not enough to enter the big boys league imo.
Posted on Reply
#13
DeathtoGnomes
Dimi said:
But who will buy it? People already complaining about pricing on 6800k & 6850k's or the 6600K and 6700K?

Too many people are expecting a sub 200-300 dollar 8C/16T cpu from AMD that will beat a 6900K. I think MANY will be disappointed again once again.

I'm certainly not going to jump on a CPU for 500+ dollar while my 4770K is still doing all it needs to do.

I also believe this only has 20 lanes? Not enough to enter the big boys league imo.
I had thought it was said that Ryzen has 32 lanes.
Posted on Reply
#14
Dimi
DeathtoGnomes said:
I had thought it was said that Ryzen has 32 lanes.
I thought i read 20 somewhere but i can't find ANY reliable info on it anymore. Google is failing me.
Posted on Reply
#15
DeathtoGnomes
Dimi said:
I thought i read 20 somewhere but i can't find ANY reliable info on it anymore. Google is failing me.
well that happens when you're an intel fanboi :eek::rolleyes::eek::respect:
Posted on Reply
#16
mcraygsx
Dimi said:
But who will buy it? People already complaining about pricing on 6800k & 6850k's or the 6600K and 6700K?

Too many people are expecting a sub 200-300 dollar 8C/16T cpu from AMD that will beat a 6900K. I think MANY will be disappointed again once again.

I'm certainly not going to jump on a CPU for 500+ dollar while my 4770K is still doing all it needs to do.

I also believe this only has 20 lanes? Not enough to enter the big boys league imo.
There will be sub $300 variants available for you down the road if that is what you desire. Even if 8C/16T cost $499-$599 it still offers better performance then my 5960K. I think AMD has a very aggressive product on their hand which is on par with INTEL's top of the range $1500+ offering. AMD is going to bring us top tier product for lower cost, which is something to be very excited about. We have too many negative rumors being posted, which should be avoided. * hint *hint.
Posted on Reply
#17
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
mcraygsx said:
There will be sub $300 variants available for you down the road if that is what you desire. Even if 8C/16T cost $499-$599 it still offers better performance then my 5960K. I think AMD has a very aggressive product on their hand which is on par with INTEL's top of the range $1500+ offering. AMD is going to bring us top tier product for lower cost, which is something to be very excited about. We have too many negative rumors being posted, which should be avoided. * hint *hint.
What we should not do is assume Ryzen will be an Intel-killer. Or that they will undercut the 6900k by $500. Or that, even if they would have Intel performance at half the price across the board, they would have enough chips to fill the demand. Because that is what I'm feeling people are thinking. It will be decent. Anything other than that is pure bonus.
Posted on Reply
#18
mcraygsx
Frick said:
What we should not do is assume Ryzen will be an Intel-killer. Or that they will undercut the 6900k by $500. Or that, even if they would have Intel performance at half the price across the board, they would have enough chips to fill the demand. Because that is what I'm feeling people are thinking. It will be decent. Anything other than that is pure bonus.
Spot on, I personally don't think it will be far superior to INTEL's core architecture but it will most likely INTEL a beating when it comes to price/performance ration.

I myself don't really care about AMD but I am excited for folk who could finally get such a CPU at lower cost. In fact I am about to headed over to Overland Park Microcenter to pickup my i7 7700K.
Posted on Reply
#19
Dbiggs9
Dimi said:
But who will buy it? People already complaining about pricing on 6800k & 6850k's or the 6600K and 6700K?

Too many people are expecting a sub 200-300 dollar 8C/16T cpu from AMD that will beat a 6900K. I think MANY will be disappointed again once again.

I'm certainly not going to jump on a CPU for 500+ dollar while my 4770K is still doing all it needs to do.

I also believe this only has 20 lanes? Not enough to enter the big boys league imo.
32 lanes
Posted on Reply
#20
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
mcraygsx said:
Spot on, I personally don't think it will be far superior to INTEL's core architecture but it will most likely INTEL a beating when it comes to price/performance ration.

I myself don't really care about AMD but I am excited for folk who could finally get such a CPU at lower cost. In fact I am about to headed over to Overland Park Microcenter to pickup my i7 7700K.
The thing is ... price/performance is less of an issue now, I feel. And it is not a linear relationship either. If Ryzen is ... say 10% slower than whatever Intel equivalent to that chip, it has to be more than 10% cheaper than the Intel chip, otherwise people will just get the Intel chip.

It is vastly difficult for AMD to come back big time and tick all boxes in the desktop space. And the more hyped up people get the better they have to be.
Posted on Reply
#21
HD64G
Point is that if the 8C/16T goes for sale with 3.6/4GHz with the stock AMD cooler (Wrath probably) and lower than 125W TDP, it will be very probable that the 4C/8T will manage to reach 4GHz without turbo and close to 4.5GHz on turbo with the same coller for less TDP. And if 8C goes for sale for less than $600, the best for gamers 4C will be a big hit if it goes for sale for less than $300 imho. I wish they manage to have plenty of units in stock once they are released in order not to lose sales.
Posted on Reply
#22
TheLaughingMan
HD64G said:
Point is that if the 8C/16T goes for sale with 3.6/4GHz with the stock AMD cooler (Wrath probably) and lower than 125W TDP, it will be very probable that the 4C/8T will manage to reach 4GHz without turbo and close to 4.5GHz on turbo with the same coller for less TDP. And if 8C goes for sale for less than $600, the best for gamers 4C will be a big hit if it goes for sale for less than $300 imho. I wish they manage to have plenty of units in stock once they are released in order not to lose sales.
Wrath is the default cooler for all AMD high performance products going forward. They already switched that some time ago. Though I would expect AIO water cooling variants for Zen as well.
Posted on Reply
#23
JMccovery
DeathtoGnomes said:
I had thought it was said that Ryzen has 32 lanes.
Look at some of the X370 boards (especially the high-end Gigabyte board, that has x16, x8 and x4 silk-screened), and you'll see the switching logic chips next to the primary X16 slot. RyZen chips have either 20 or 24 lanes.

Most likely is 20 from the CPU, with 4 additional from X370.
Posted on Reply
#24
Arnulf
Dimi said:
I thought i read 20 somewhere but i can't find ANY reliable info on it anymore. Google is failing me.
It is 20 directly from the CPU (16 + 4, which will typically be used for GPU and NVMe drive), the rest are from the platform hub ("chipset").
Posted on Reply
#25
phanbuey
HD64G said:
Point is that if the 8C/16T goes for sale with 3.6/4GHz with the stock AMD cooler (Wrath probably) and lower than 125W TDP, it will be very probable that the 4C/8T will manage to reach 4GHz without turbo and close to 4.5GHz on turbo with the same coller for less TDP. And if 8C goes for sale for less than $600, the best for gamers 4C will be a big hit if it goes for sale for less than $300 imho. I wish they manage to have plenty of units in stock once they are released in order not to lose sales.
It will be interesting to see... I hope so too. Can't wait to read some reviews haven't had an AMD system since my original socket 754.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment