Wednesday, September 27th 2017

AMD's Pinnacle Ridge Zen+ 12 nm CPUs to Launch on February 2018

A recent AMD roadmap leak showed the company's "tick", process-improved plans for 2018's Zen+, as well as its painter-imbued aspirations with Zen 2 in 2019. Now, there's some new info posted by DigiTimes that's being sourced straight from motherboard makers that points to the company's Pinnacle Ridge launch being set sometime in February 2018.

This information seems to have been delivered to the motherboard makers straight from AMD itself, as a heads-up for when they should be expecting to ramp up production of next-generation chipsets. Sources report that AMD will follow their Summit Ridge, Ryzen launch, with the initial release of Pinnacle 7 in February, followed by the mid-range Pinnacle 5 and entry-level Pinnacle 3 processors in March 2018. DigiTimes also reports that AMD is expecting to see its share of the desktop CPU market return to at least 30% in the first half of 2018 which, coeteris paribus, is more of a simple mathematical progression than clarvoyance.
The information is particularly important to motherboard makers because, according to DigiTimes, this should allow AMD's partners to gear-up for new motherboard launches with next-generation 400-series chipsets (still designed by ASMedia). X470 and B450-based motherboards are said to be the first to hit the store shelves, with ramp-up orders for the chipsets being expected to grow dramatically starting January 2018. We shouldn't have to worry about having to purchase new motherboards for the new and improved Ryzen processors, though - AMD did promise AM4 would last until 2020, where it's expected that relevant new technologies such as PCIe 4.0 and DDR5 will hit the market.

AMD is also expected to further launch a low-power version of Pinnacle processors in April 2018, with an enterprise version Pinnacle Pro following in May 2018. 2018 is gearing up to be a busy year for AMD as well. Source: DigiTimes
Add your own comment

39 Comments on AMD's Pinnacle Ridge Zen+ 12 nm CPUs to Launch on February 2018

#1
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
R-T-B said:
I mean like, an overclocked 1800X and stock i7 6700k. That would eliminate the clock part of the equation as they basically clock similar.

No, it's not a "fair" benchmark. But I'm still curious.

I've done this in CPU-Z on my 1800X and it basically pans out equal. But that isn't "gaming."
Here's a ton of CPU's (including Phenom II!) running at the same clocks (2.8Ghz). Ryzen is lagging, but the main thing is definitely clock speeds.

johnspack said:
Just hurry the hell up already so I can buy a used 8 or 10 core cpu soon for a price that isn't stupid.
I would say the 1700 does not have a stupid price at < €300.
Posted on Reply
#2
R-T-B
Frick said:
Here's a ton of CPU's (including Phenom II!) running at the same clocks (2.8Ghz). Ryzen is lagging, but the main thing is definitely clock speeds.



I would say the 1700 does not have a stupid price at < €300.
So it beats a 4790k. That's not bad. Not stellar either, but considering where AMD was, certainly incredible to think about.
Posted on Reply
#3
BiggieShady
efikkan said:
Ryzen is not on par with Skylake in games running at the same clock, despite having more computational resources. This is due to an inferior prefetcher, which results in more cache and branch misses. We'll see when Zen2 arrives…
Again with the inferior prefetcher ... one part of the latency does come from cache misses but in this case cache misses are because thread is being bounced between CCX-es and not because of inferior prefetcher.
Posted on Reply
#4
Durvelle27
Frick said:
Here's a ton of CPU's (including Phenom II!) running at the same clocks (2.8Ghz). Ryzen is lagging, but the main thing is definitely clock speeds.



I would say the 1700 does not have a stupid price at < €300.
What lag I didn’t see such a thing
Posted on Reply
#5
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Durvelle27 said:
What lag I didn’t see such a thing
Lagging behind, as in not as fast as Skylake or Kaby Lake, in games.
Posted on Reply
#6
Durvelle27
Frick said:
Lagging behind, as in not as fast as Skylake or Kaby Lake, in games.
Kaby in almost all those is barely faster than Ryzen while being almost 600MHz clocked higher. 10-20 FPS on average with 100+FPS.

i wouldn't call that lagging behind considering Ryzen is cheaper












Posted on Reply
#7
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Durvelle27 said:
Kaby in almost all those is barely faster than Ryzen while being almost 600MHz clocked higher. 10-20 FPS on average with 100+FPS.

i wouldn't call that lagging behind considering Ryzen is cheaper













The discussion was about Ryzen and Skylake on the same clocks, which is why I linked the page where all the tested CPUs run at 2.8Ghz.
Posted on Reply
#8
Durvelle27
Frick said:
The discussion was about Ryzen and Skylake on the same clocks, which is why I linked the page where all the tested CPUs run at 2.8Ghz.
With all the processors running at the same clock frequency, we can take a closer look at the Ryzen processors' IPC in the single-row run of Cinebench. Intel Broadwell-E is closer to 4 percent higher than AMD's newcomer, while newly-shot Kaby Lake wins the field by about 7 percent better performance than Ryzen clock-by-clock.

However, in the multi-threaded part-test, the AMD Ryzen wire seems somewhat better than Broadwell-E, placing the models just above the eight-core rivals Core i7-6900K.
Posted on Reply
#9
Vayra86
Durvelle27 said:
With all the processors running at the same clock frequency, we can take a closer look at the Ryzen processors' IPC in the single-row run of Cinebench. Intel Broadwell-E is closer to 4 percent higher than AMD's newcomer, while newly-shot Kaby Lake wins the field by about 7 percent better performance than Ryzen clock-by-clock.

However, in the multi-threaded part-test, the AMD Ryzen wire seems somewhat better than Broadwell-E, placing the models just above the eight-core rivals Core i7-6900K.
But that's precisely it, these two small gaps (clock potential and IPC) do add up and result in a tangible performance gap with the top-end mainstream Intel parts. A gap is a gap, let's not deny it, and its a problem AMD needs to solve ASAP, because it will make Ryzen as interesting for mainstream as TR is for HEDT. TR is actually a superior design in that segment, but Ryzen within mainstream is a concession.
Posted on Reply
#10
Vya Domus
Vayra86 said:
and its a problem AMD needs to solve ASAP.
I hope not , I don't want all CPUs to be identical. It's perfectly fine for AMD to have the core count advantage and decent single thread performance at a low price. We all know how things end up when you try to reach for the best results in every single area.
Posted on Reply
#11
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
People fail to realize AMD emerged from a performance/heat deficit of Bulldozer/Piledriver (atleast anything less than a 6300) and closed the gap and provides like performance of "6th, 7th gen" Core i cpus but on a better price. So it was a large leap for them, AMD is really not holding back on Threadripper or Epyc platforms either as that appears to be their big focal point (servers)

What I would like to truly see is that Threadripper and Epyc Lines use the same exact socket electrically/physically and launch 1 and 2 way Server/HEDT boards, maybe find tape tricks too like how the Athlon XPs could be made into Athlon MPs or XP-Ms

I honestly feel AMD has learned a lot on the nuances of their Ryzen lineup and is geared to make Ryzen+ and Ryzen 2 considerably better unlike minor improvements that Intel has made across the core i lineup.
Posted on Reply
#12
Vayra86
Vya Domus said:
I hope not , I don't want all CPUs to be identical. It's perfectly fine for AMD to have the core count advantage and decent single thread performance at a low price. We all know how things end up when you try to reach for the best results in every single area.
LOL yeah, you're actually in danger of becoming a market leader when you do everything right... And get good margins to fund your R&D

With a fanbase that reasons like you, AMD doesn't even need enemies!
Posted on Reply
#13
Vya Domus
Vayra86 said:
LOL yeah, you're actually in danger of becoming a market leader when you do everything right... And get good margins to fund your R&D
Look at the history of all these 30-40 years of the semiconductor industry and you'll see that the most successful products where almost never the "very best"and also not necessarily backed by astronomic R&D budgets. It's why you've got things such one of Intel's most successful chip , the Penitum 4 , everywhere despite it being objectively , garbage. I simply fail to see the value in having products that differ just by which brand tag they have slapped onto them. If you do , by all means go ahead and support such a market with your only weapon as a consumer , your wallet.

I want to have the option to buy products from different companies that have different characteristics at different price points. As it happens that's very convenient for AMD because of two reasons :

1) The days of having improvements in terms of CPU technology by an X factor across the board are long gone , most of what you can do today is push for a couple of things while trying to mitigate your losses in other areas.

2) It's the only way for them to differentiate themselves. I certainly wouldn't have been impressed by Ryzen 7 for example if it was a 4c/8t CPU at 5 Ghz for the same money as the 7700K . No reason to buy one over the other.

Thankfully , AMD understood this.

Vayra86 said:

With a fanbase that reasons like you, AMD doesn't even need enemies!
I'm not part of any fanbase , it's a mindset that can prevent us from being overrun by overpriced garbage which on top of that is the same everywhere you look. Something like the smartphone industry.

Basically , you can look at it which ever way you want , you're neither right or wrong.
Posted on Reply
#14
Vayra86
Understood, I can see your point.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment