Wednesday, January 4th 2017

AMD Ryzen "Pinnacle Ridge" Processors Launch in March

There is more clarity on when AMD plans to launch its 2nd generation Ryzen "Pinnacle Ridge" processors, along with companion 400-series chipsets. Retailers in Japan, citing upstream suppliers, expect AMD to launch Ryzen # 2000-series (or "Ryzen 2") processors in March 2018, along with two motherboard chipset models, the top-tier AMD X470, and the mid-range AMD B450. An older report pegged this launch at February. The two chipsets are differentiated from their current-generation 300-series counterparts in featuring PCI-Express gen 3.0 general purpose lanes. The "Pinnacle Ridge" processors, on the other hand, are expected to be optical-shrinks of current Ryzen "Summit Ridge" silicon to the new 12 nm silicon fabrication process, which will allow AMD to increase clock speeds with minimal impact on power-draw.

AMD Ryzen 2 "Pinnacle Ridge" processors will be built in the existing socket AM4 package, and are expected to be compatible with existing socket AM4 motherboards, subject to BIOS updates by motherboard manufacturers. AMD plans to nurture the socket AM4 ecosystem till 2020. Future motherboards based on AMD 400-series chipsets could also feature compatibility with existing "Summit Ridge" Ryzen processors. These motherboards will come with out of the box support for Ryzen "Raven Ridge" APUs, something that requires BIOS updates on current 300-series chipset motherboards.
Source: Hermitage Akihabara
Add your own comment

38 Comments on AMD Ryzen "Pinnacle Ridge" Processors Launch in March

#1
Assimilator
I hope they integrate USB 3.1 gen 2 suport into these chipsets - would give a welcome advantage over Intel.

Also, all the PCIe lanes AMD, plzkthx.
Posted on Reply
#2
notb
Yes, yes.
WTF happened to the APU?
Posted on Reply
#3
MAXLD
Good, but let's hope they're way less picky with RAM models and settings. Current dimm prices alone are painful enough...
Posted on Reply
#4
Basard
Ah, yes... the always-promised clock speed increase after process shrink. I wont be holding my breath. Unless they can pull 800mhz out their butts.
Posted on Reply
#5
Ubersonic
Basard said:
Ah, yes... the always-promised clock speed increase after process shrink. I wont be holding my breath. Unless they can pull 800mhz out their butts.
You mean just like Intel did when they moved from 1st to 2nd gen i7 and shrank from 45nm to 32nm?
Posted on Reply
#7
orionbg
And still not a word on Threadripper 2xxx series...
Posted on Reply
#8
Chaitanya
orionbg said:
And still not a word on Threadripper 2xxx series...
Those might make appearance later in year. current threadripper platform has hardly been out for a couple of months.




I dont expect more than 10% improvements in clock speed but fixes to all the issues with platform launch to be fixed with this refresh.
Posted on Reply
#9
notb
orionbg said:
And still not a word on Threadripper 2xxx series...
Why would they make it?
How many Threadripper owners do you know?
Look around PC specs of people on this forum. How many of us have a TR? Meanwhile quite a lot of us already got the the X299 HEDT, not to mention the X99 crowd.

TR is a good show-off platform. It did its job very well. Move on.
Posted on Reply
#10
bug
Since these are simply optical shrinks, isn't Summit Ridge a more appropriate name? :P
Posted on Reply
#11
Basard
Ubersonic said:
You mean just like Intel did when they moved from 1st to 2nd gen i7 and shrank from 45nm to 32nm?
Intel can make physically-better chips than AMD because the people making the chips actually work for Intel, and therefore care a lot more.
Posted on Reply
#12
RejZoR
It's a shame low end laptops are migrating at almost non existent speed to Ryzen. I was hoping to grab a bottom end Ryzen APU to replace my aging E-450 APU (Zacate) and I was kinda forced to buy A9-9420 (Stoney Ridge) because AMD simply isn't planning to release Ryzen. It's better than old Bulldozer architecture, but still not Ryzen which annoys me a bit :(

I've seen few laptops with new generation Ryzen R5 2500U already. But they are above 700€ mark and that's just too much. Stoney Ridge was a 380€ laptop and I took the top end model.
Posted on Reply
#13
orionbg
notb said:
Why would they make it?
How many Threadripper owners do you know?
Look around PC specs of people on this forum. How many of us have a TR? Meanwhile quite a lot of us already got the the X299 HEDT, not to mention the X99 crowd.

TR is a good show-off platform. It did its job very well. Move on.
I'm waiting for DHL to bring me my new 1950x today, and I'm sure many other people are having them also! Not to mention that nobody to date have been able to beat the price/performance ratio of the Threadripper! Not to mention that TR4 motherboards are not catching fire if their VRMs are not cryogenically frozen! :D :D That last one is a joke but still...
Posted on Reply
#14
Upgrayedd
Basard said:
Intel can make physically-better chips than AMD because the people making the chips actually work for Intel, and therefore care a lot more.
Can't tell if serious.
That is like saying this or that cookie is better because of momma's special ingredient, love. When they were baked with the same ingredients.
There may actually be something about making your own wafer, finding a new or better method that isn't patented yet. But I doubt love is their special ingredient.

I been wanting a new APU as well folks. My Llano died not too long ago.
Posted on Reply
#15
orionbg
Chaitanya said:
Those might make appearance later in year. current threadripper platform has hardly been out for a couple of months.

I dont expect more than 10% improvements in clock speed but fixes to all the issues with platform launc to be fixed with this refresh.
Can't ask for more out of a simple refresh... The die shrink will lower power and bring some slightly better clocks, the rest I hope for are fixes and better memory support.
Posted on Reply
#16
[XC] Oj101
Basard said:
Ah, yes... the always-promised clock speed increase after process shrink. I wont be holding my breath. Unless they can pull 800mhz out their butts.
It won't be 800 MHz, more like 200 MHz.
Posted on Reply
#17
Chaitanya
orionbg said:
Can't ask for more out of a simple refresh... The die shrink will lower power and bring some slightly better clocks, the rest I hope for are fixes and better memory support.
fixed memory compatibility and support for faster speeds would be more than helpful.
Posted on Reply
#18
RejZoR
500Mhz would already be significant boost. I mean, current Ryzens go to 4GHz. If they can pull 4.5 GHz out of the box, and maybe some IPC boost, that's pretty neat imo. Remember, pretty much nothing runs beyond these high frequencies. Only way they can boost performance is to increase IPC at this point...
Posted on Reply
#19
Xajel
Assimilator said:
I hope they integrate USB 3.1 gen 2 suport into these chipsets - would give a welcome advantage over Intel.

Also, all the PCIe lanes AMD, plzkthx.
Current Ryzen platform already have USB 3.1 g2, the X370 & B350 has 2 while the A320 only has 1...
Posted on Reply
#20
ironwolf
IceShroom said:
Currently all AMD chipset support USB 3.1.
X370 :
2 USB 3.1 (G2)
10 USB 3.0 (aka USB 3.1 G1)
6 USB 2.0

B350 :
2 USB 3.1 (G2)
6 USB 3.0 (aka USB 3.1 G1)
6 USB 2.0

A320 :
1 USB 3.1 (G2)
6 USB 3.0 (aka USB 3.1 G1)
6 USB 2.0

Here is the link : https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_1800X/3.html
Corrected that a little for you, the USB 3.1 ports on that chart are the G2 version, the USB 3.0 ports on that chart are USB 3.1 G1. It's ridiculous how they renamed USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 G1, very confusing.
Posted on Reply
#21
bug
Chaitanya said:
fixed memory compatibility and support for faster speeds would be more than helpful.
They've clearly stated memory compatibility had to be sacrificed to meet the desired TTM. With no additional statement from AMD about memory compatibility (and the constant reference to an "optical shrink"), I'd assume they haven't revisited the controller just yet.
Posted on Reply
#22
Basard
Upgrayedd said:
Can't tell if serious.
That is like saying this or that cookie is better because of momma's special ingredient, love. When they were baked with the same ingredients.
There may actually be something about making your own wafer, finding a new or better method that isn't patented yet. But I doubt love is their special ingredient.

I been wanting a new APU as well folks. My Llano died not too long ago.
Actually, Momma can bake a better cookie than nabisco, using the same ingredients. That's about as close to fact as one can get.
Posted on Reply
#23
IceShroom
ironwolf said:
Corrected that a little for you, the USB 3.1 ports on that chart are the G2 version, the USB 3.0 ports on that chart are USB 3.1 G1. It's ridiculous how they renamed USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 G1, very confusing.
Yeah, very confusing. Kind a untechnical too. USB 3.1(G2) use 128/132 bit encoding to transfer data, where's USB 3.0(3.1 G1) use 8/10 bit encoding. So USB 3.1(G2) has les overhead compared to USB 3.0(3.1 G1).
Posted on Reply
#24
R0H1T
IceShroom said:
Yeah, very confusing. Kind a untechnical too. USB 3.1(G2) use 128/132 bit encoding to transfer data, where's USB 3.0(3.1 G1) use 8/10 bit encoding. So USB 3.1(G2) has les overhead compared to USB 3.0(3.1 G1).
It was simply USB 3.0 & 3.1 before some wise guy decided they want gen1 & gen2 instead of the regular 3.1, presumably to make it more confusing? And what do you know it gets even more confusing with USB 3.2 ~
  • USB 3.2 Gen 1x1 - SuperSpeed, 5 Gbit/s (625 MB/s) data signaling rate over 1 lane using 8b/10b encoding, the same as USB 3.1 Gen 1 and USB 3.0.
  • USB 3.2 Gen 2x1 - SuperSpeed+, 10 Gbit/s (1250 MB/s) data rate over 1 lane using 128b/132b encoding, the same as USB 3.1 Gen 2.
  • USB 3.2 Gen 1x2 - SuperSpeed+, new 10 Gbit/s (1250 MB/s) data rate over 2 lanes using 8b/10b encoding.
  • USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 - SuperSpeed+, new 20 Gbit/s (2500 MB/s) data rate over 2 lanes using 128b/132b encoding.
Posted on Reply
#25
IceShroom
R0H1T said:
It was simply USB 3.0 & 3.1 before some wise guy decided they want gen1 & gen2 instead of the regular 3.1, presumably to make it more confusing? And what do you know it gets even more confusing with USB 3.2 ~
Didn't see that coming.:eek:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment