Monday, June 10th 2019

AMD E3 Next Horizon Event: Live Blog

It's been a very busy May-June for AMD as the company pushes out its major client-segment product lines spread across Computex 2019, and E3 2019. At Computex, the company focused on its 3rd generation Ryzen "Zen 2" desktop processors, and led its partners to show us a galaxy of new motherboards based on the AMD X570 chipset. It turns out that the company was saving a handful processor SKUs focused on gamers for E3.

The second important product launch of course is Radeon RX 5700 series, based on AMD's new "Navi 10" silicon on which its new RDNA graphics architecture debuts. With its AIB (add-in board) partners expected to be allowed to make custom-design cards, and based on what little nuggets of information AMD put out, "Navi" promises to stir up a key performance-segment price-band that's currently held by NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 2070 and RTX 2060. The AMD keynote will see the company CEO Dr. Lisa Su and her top execs take centerstage to make some big announcements. With E3 being a purely entertainment / client-segment forum, the AMD keynote promises not bore with tiresome topics such as AI, self-driving cars, etc.
2:30 PM PDT: Ahead of its keynote, AMD posted a teaser video of its new RDNA graphics architecture on YouTube.


3:00 PM PDT: The event begins with CEO Dr. Lisa Su taking centerstage. "Exciting time for gamers everywhere, with coherence between hardware and software."

3:06 PM PDT: "AMD owes its recent success to big technology bets that are paying off now."

3:07 PM PDT: Lisa Su confirms next-generation PlayStation is powered by AMD IP, as is Google Stadia. Also talks about the Xbox "Project Scarlett"

3:08 PM PDT: PC. Now we're talking.

3:11 PM PDT: Key details on Zen 2 CPU architecture at the heart of Ryzen 3000. Also AMD's performance claims. We've seen these slides at the Computex 2019 keynote.

3:16 PM PDT: AMD answering Intel's "real-world gaming" challenge:

3:18 PM PDT: Ryzen 5 3600X specs confirmed, including gaming performance. Beats Core i5-9600K.

All CPU models available 7/7/2019.

3:20 PM PDT: Time to talk Navi. Maintains RDNA is a cleanslate architecture.

3:25 PM PDT: Meet the Radeon RX 5700 XT. Leadership performance in its class.

3:27 PM PDT: The leaks seem to be correct. "Ready for overclocking"

Performance beats the RTX 2070 in World War Z.

3:29 PM PDT: Radeon RX 5700 (non-XT) Specs:

Up to 10% faster than RTX 2060 (RX 5700 non-XT).

Radeon Media Engine supports 4K encode and decode, and updated codecs for hardware-acceleration. Radeon Display Engine has updated connectivity.

3:33 PM PDT: FidelityFX pre-baked free-to-use special effects that improve visual fidelity without performance cost; available through GPUOpen.

3:35 PM PDT: Radeon Image Sharpening is essentially FidelityFX for games that don't support it.

3:36 PM PDT: Radeon Anti-Lag is a groundbreaking new feature that works to reduce GPU-to-monitor lag and input lag. Treat for e-sports gamers.
Lower input-lag without increasing frame-rates!

3:40 PM PDT: Pricing! Availability 7/7/2019, both SKUs. RX 5700 XT is priced at $449, and RX 5700 at $379. "Gears 5" bundled!

3:47 PM PDT: Gears 5 as rendered on an RX 5700 XT.

Although Gears 5 releases September, RX 5700-series buyers who get the game bundled also have early access to pre-release testing versions from July.

3:54 PM PDT: Borderlands 3 is Ryzen+Radeon optimized, including FidelityFX. Gearbox also uttered "AMD Studios," an internal dev-relations moniker, detailed as a steady supply of AMD hardware to game developers at Gearbox. AMD is flexing its dev-relations muscle once again.

4:00 PM PDT: Unity talks about HDRP. Also confirms Ryzen+Radeon optimization, and support for FidelityFX.

4:07 PM PDT: Ubisoft confirms Ryzen+Radeon optimization for Tom Clancy's "Ghost Recon: Breakpoint," including FidelityFX, async-compute, FreeSync 2 HDR.

4:11 PM PDT: AMD launches Radeon RX 5700X 50th Anniversary Edition with 1.98 GHz Boost frequency, priced at $499, exclusively on AMD.com
4:12 AM PDT: AMD also announces Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core processor, priced $749, launches September.
Add your own comment

133 Comments on AMD E3 Next Horizon Event: Live Blog

#76
HwGeek
So like I thought, AMD maintained max 105W for backwards compatibility, but it let's you use the new CPU's at their full potential with new PBO/XFR that now offers Boost to max boost clocks too!
Look at Ryzen 5 3600- It achieves 9900K ST score!
Posted on Reply
#77
john_
Navi prices are bad. They are for shareholders, not consumers.

I really don't see a reason to say to a company "High prices, how great this is. Please, don't stop there".
I also don't understand people who think that people complaining about the prices are just.... poor.
I also never understood people who where supporting monopolistic, or in this case duopolistic tactics.

AMD's pricing on new CPUs is great. On GPUs, not so great. Probably they can't get enough capacity from TSMC, so putting lower prices would have been meaningless. Maybe they just keep up with Nvidia's pricing, because they know that higher future prices, is an advantage for them too. Let's not forget that AMD is also selling APUs, so higher descrete GPU pricing means also freedom to have APUs at higher price points in the future. They will integrate higher performing iGPUs in the near future thanks to 7nm, so moving descrete GPUs at higher price points, releases more price points for APUs. The next best performing APU could come at $199 or even over $200.

Anyone hoping Intel will come and fix that, Intel is a premium brand and the Intel sticker sometimes costs more than the product itself.
Posted on Reply
#78
Shatun_Bear
Hey guys how's it going. Remember when I said AdoredTV claiming the 16-core having a base clock of 4.3Ghz was absurd yet too many posters here laughed? Yeah, it was only 800Mhz higher than reality...3.5Ghz base clock on the 3950X is what we should have expected but common sense is in short order on tech forums these days.

Also, where is @R0H1T, I made a £10 bet with this guy no Ryzen 3000 launch CPU would have a base clock 4Ghz or higher. :)
Posted on Reply
#79
springs113
Shatun_Bear said:

Hey guys how's it going. Remember when I said AdoredTV claiming the 16-core having a base clock of 4.3Ghz was absurd yet too many posters here laughed? Yeah, it was only 800Mhz higher than reality...3.5Ghz base clock on the 3950X is what we should have expected but common sense is in short order on tech forums these days.

Also, where is @R0H1T, I made a £10 bet with this guy no Ryzen 3000 launch CPU would have a base clock 4Ghz or higher. :)
honestly they could've easily put a 4ghz CPU out. They wanted to keep the low tdps so they let it be. The 3900/3950 could've easily been one of those but AMD wanted that 105w tdp.
Posted on Reply
#80
medi01
john_ said:

AMD's pricing on new CPUs is great. On GPUs, not so great. Probably they can't get enough capacity from TSMC, so putting lower prices would have been meaningless.
Maybe it's also because there are stocks of V56 / V64 to be sold.

But generally, AMD cannot be in nonstop "heavy undercutting to gain marketshare" mode.
It also doesn't seem to work in GPU market, with zounds of people buying 1050/1050Ti/1650 over 570.
Posted on Reply
#81
R0H1T
Shatun_Bear said:

Also, where is @R0H1T, I made a £10 bet with this guy no Ryzen 3000 launch CPU would have a base clock 4Ghz or higher. :)
You're hanging by a 0.1 Ghz thread here & the entire 3xxx lineup isn't even launched yet. I'm not going anywhere, but I suggest you wait till the full lineup is revealed.
Posted on Reply
#82
medi01
Shatun_Bear said:

Hey guys how's it going. Remember when I said AdoredTV claiming the 16-core having a base clock of 4.3Ghz was absurd yet too many posters here laughed? Yeah, it was only 800Mhz higher than reality...3.5Ghz base clock on the 3950X is what we should have expected but common sense is in short order on tech forums these days.

Also, where is @R0H1T, I made a £10 bet with this guy no Ryzen 3000 launch CPU would have a base clock 4Ghz or higher. :)
4.7Ghz boost makes 4.3Ghz base not look that unrealistic at all.
Have you made claims about max clocks?
Posted on Reply
#83
londiste
medi01 said:
4.7Ghz boost makes 4.3Ghz base not look that unrealistic at all.
Have you made claims about max clocks?
You are aware that the specifications for Ryzen 3000 processors are official and public, right?
https://www.amd.com/en/products/specifications/processors/11776+1736+1896+2466

R0H1T said:
You're hanging by a 0.1 Ghz thread here & the entire 3xxx lineup isn't even launched yet. I'm not going anywhere, but I suggest you wait till the full lineup is revealed.
What is missing from the lineup?
That 4.0GHz was a general claim here, what sparked the thing in the first place was the claimed 4.3GHz that was clearly excessive one and 3.9 GHz is 0.4GHz off from that.
Posted on Reply
#84
Vayra86
I finally understand why they designed that Radeon like this



Lisa just has strong hands.

Shatun_Bear said:

Hey guys how's it going. Remember when I said AdoredTV claiming the 16-core having a base clock of 4.3Ghz was absurd yet too many posters here laughed? Yeah, it was only 800Mhz higher than reality...3.5Ghz base clock on the 3950X is what we should have expected but common sense is in short order on tech forums these days.

Also, where is @R0H1T, I made a £10 bet with this guy no Ryzen 3000 launch CPU would have a base clock 4Ghz or higher. :)
Indeed where are they :D Well played, sir.
Posted on Reply
#85
TheLostSwede
john_ said:

Navi prices are bad. They are for shareholders, not consumers.

I really don't see a reason to say to a company "High prices, how great this is. Please, don't stop there".
I also don't understand people who think that people complaining about the prices are just.... poor.
I also never understood people who where supporting monopolistic, or in this case duopolistic tactics.

AMD's pricing on new CPUs is great. On GPUs, not so great. Probably they can't get enough capacity from TSMC, so putting lower prices would have been meaningless. Maybe they just keep up with Nvidia's pricing, because they know that higher future prices, is an advantage for them too. Let's not forget that AMD is also selling APUs, so higher descrete GPU pricing means also freedom to have APUs at higher price points in the future. They will integrate higher performing iGPUs in the near future thanks to 7nm, so moving descrete GPUs at higher price points, releases more price points for APUs. The next best performing APU could come at $199 or even over $200.

Anyone hoping Intel will come and fix that, Intel is a premium brand and the Intel sticker sometimes costs more than the product itself.
Do we have a choice? Where is the competition? In fact, this is getting true for more and more markets, where companies are consolidated on almost a weekly basis for billions of dollars.
This is unfortunately the world we're living in at the moment. A lot of innovation disappears before it even becomes a real product.
Here's a great example of a company that was bought out and disappeared before there was even a product
https://www.anandtech.com/show/2752

Unless Intel can come up with a decent GPU, it looks like we're stuck with Nvidia for the foreseeable future if you want a high-end graphics card and then we're stuck with the current insane pricing. It seems like you have to be a professional gamer at top level to be able to afford a decent graphics card now...
I don't have high hopes, but as Intel would be the underdog in the GPU market, they'd have to deliver something competitive in terms of pricing as well.
Posted on Reply
#86
medi01
TheLostSwede said:

Unless Intel can come up with a decent GPU, it looks like we're stuck with Nvidia for the foreseeable future if you want a high-end graphics card
What? Because AMD doesn't have a product beating your 1080?
Hold on, it does.

PS
This kind of twisted "logic" in your post is mind boggling.
Posted on Reply
#87
TheLostSwede
medi01 said:

What? Because AMD doesn't have a product beating your 1080?
Hold on, it does.

PS
This kind of twisted "logic" in your post is mind boggling.
Eh? I'm sorry, but I don't know what you're on about. Whatever my current PC is or isn't, isn't relevant to this discussion.

AMD hasn't been able to deliver a properly competitive GPU for several generations now, for whatever reason, so do you really think they'll pull a rabbit out of a hat and deliver something competitive now? Besides, we need more competition, as @john_ alluded to above. But clearly you're happy with a duopoly.

Maybe you don't remember the days when there was half a dozen or more GPU makers, but I do. Back then, there was competition, both in terms of performance and pricing and there was a wide choice of solutions to chose from. Sadly Nvidia and ATI became too dominant and all the other GPU makers either went bust or gave up. It's terrible for consumers when these things happen, but apparently you're happy buying a so-so product for a high price because, reasons...
Posted on Reply
#88
R0H1T
londiste said:

What is missing from the lineup?
Ryzen 3, I assume you missed that one? There's also a possibility of other xx50 parts slotting in with higher clocks.
londiste said:

That 4.0GHz was a general claim here, what sparked the thing in the first place was the claimed 4.3GHz that was clearly excessive one and 3.9 GHz is 0.4GHz off from that.
I only talked about 4 GHz base clock (nearly) being a certainty, 4.3 GHz was way down the list on what was plausible.
Posted on Reply
#90
biffzinker
TheLostSwede said:

Here's a great example of a company that was bought out and disappeared before there was even a product
https://www.anandtech.com/show/2752
Thanks for the link I forgot about Caustic Graphics. I did find these two boards from Caustic by Imagination.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/161074-the-future-of-ray-tracing-reviewed-caustics-r2500-accelerator-finally-moves-us-towards-real-time-ray-tracing

[MEDIA=vimeo]59618981[/MEDIA] [MEDIA=vimeo]59512797[/MEDIA]
Posted on Reply
#91
Shatun_Bear
springs113 said:

honestly they could've easily put a 4ghz CPU out. They wanted to keep the low tdps so they let it be. The 3900/3950 could've easily been one of those but AMD wanted that 105w tdp.
This is my point, there is a huge difference between 'could have' and what is reasonable or what to expect. For TDP reasons, none of the launch SKUs were going past 4Ghz base, and there was also simply no need. So saying 'they could have easily put a 4Ghz CPU out' is equally silly.

R0H1T said:

Ryzen 3, I assume you missed that one? There's also a possibility of other xx50 parts slotting in with higher clocks.
I only talked about 4 GHz base clock (nearly) being a certainty, 4.3 GHz was way down the list on what was plausible.
Well there is 4.3Ghz base clock which is absurd on its own. But the claims from the Scottish guy was 4.3Ghz base clock on a sixteen core processor, which I am still laughing about to this day (I'm that sad). This was the gigantic red flag warning us all that his info was fantasy but what frustrated me is the legions of 'fans' shooting any naysayers down without thinking!

And give it up, I doubt 4Ghz base on any of the remaining SKUs which is not really what our bet was about.
Posted on Reply
#92
medi01
TheLostSwede said:

AMD hasn't been able to deliver a properly competitive GPU for several generations now
In which slice of the market?
$1300? Yeah, how terrible.

In lower end? 570 stomping all over competition, still faster than 1650.
Mid range? Check pricing on V56 and V64.

And now the claim that $449 card that beats $500 card "isn't competitive". boo.
Posted on Reply
#93
springs113
Shatun_Bear said:

This is my point, there is a huge difference between 'could have' and what is reasonable or what to expect. For TDP reasons, none of the launch SKUs were going past 4Ghz base, and there was also simply no need. So saying 'they could have easily put a 4Ghz CPU out' is equally silly.



Well there is 4.3Ghz base clock which is absurd on its own. But the claims from the Scottish guy was 4.3Ghz base clock on a sixteen core processor, which I am still laughing about to this day (I'm that sad). This was the gigantic red flag warning us all that his info was fantasy but what frustrated me is the legions of 'fans' shooting any naysayers down without thinking!

And give it up, I doubt 4Ghz base on any of the remaining SKUs which is not really what our bet was about.
how is what I said silly... honestly you sound silly getting bent out of shape about 100mhz. The processor(3800x) is at 3.9ghz, adding 100mhz to that is not hard at all. Im almost certain the extra 100mhz would've moved right off their goal of 105w tdp. If you check out their entire line up 105w is their max tdp. AMD did good stop whining about silly things.

On another note how do you guys complain about something you won't vee buying anyways. If you don't like a product, don't bad mouth it. It's simple don't buy it and stay away from threads talking about it. Spreading propaganda for what? Self preservation? Pleasure? Smh. This is why I usually stay off the forums. The toxicity is rampant. I've got plenty of AMD, Intel and Nvidia products in my household. I will badmouth none of them. I'll spend my money on what suits my needs not forum members. I'll be getting an all AMD system once again, I can't justify 1300 U.S. on a GPU that will be obsolete in less than a year.
Posted on Reply
#94
Shatun_Bear
springs113 said:

how is what I said silly... honestly you sound silly getting bent out of shape about 100mhz. The processor(3800x) is at 3.9ghz, adding 100mhz to that is not hard at all. Im almost certain the extra 100mhz would've moved right off their goal of 105w tdp. If you check out their entire line up 105w is their max tdp. AMD did good stop whining about silly things.
Behave yourself.
Posted on Reply
#95
JB_Gamer
TheLostSwede said:

Do we have a choice? Where is the competition? In fact, this is getting true for more and more markets, where companies are consolidated on almost a weekly basis for billions of dollars.
This is unfortunately the world we're living in at the moment. A lot of innovation disappears before it even becomes a real product.
Here's a great example of a company that was bought out and disappeared before there was even a product
https://www.anandtech.com/show/2752

Unless Intel can come up with a decent GPU, it looks like we're stuck with Nvidia for the foreseeable future if you want a high-end graphics card and then we're stuck with the current insane pricing. It seems like you have to be a professional gamer at top level to be able to afford a decent graphics card now...
I don't have high hopes, but as Intel would be the underdog in the GPU market, they'd have to deliver something competitive in terms of pricing as well.
So who bought them out, do You know?

/Another swede - but not lost;)
Posted on Reply
#96
nemesis.ie
@springs113 On the other side, it probably is good for people to talk about the security issues on Intel (not necessarily directly bash them though) as there does not seem to be very little awareness of the problem or the impact of the so far released fixes in non-enthusiast circles.
Posted on Reply
#98
nemesis.ie
I want to see it on custom liquid, not on LN2 etc. ;)
Posted on Reply
#99
londiste
nemesis.ie said:
@springs113 On the other side, it probably is good for people to talk about the security issues on Intel (not necessarily directly bash them though) as there does not seem to be very little awareness of the problem or the impact of the so far released fixes in non-enthusiast circles.


When looking at state of things in Intel's 9000 series (at least 9600K, 9700K and 9900K):
- Meltdown and Fireshadow/L1TF are fixed in hardware, Spectre and SSB are handled by OS/VMM (with help from firmware/hardware). This matches Zen and Zen+. Zen2 has some additional things for Spectre but the exact nature of the added hardware mitigation does not seem to be known yet and software component remains.
- Spectre V3a should be handled by the same mitigations as other Spectres on Intel CPUs. LazyFPU was IIRC handled by OSs.
- Spoiler and MDS are new enough that they could not be handled in hardware at this point. Both have some level of mitigation via firmware/software.

Impact is generally much lower for gaming and other light usage than server/rendering/compiling tests show.
Posted on Reply
#100
TheLostSwede
biffzinker said:

Thanks for the link I forgot about Caustic Graphics. I did find these two boards from Caustic by Imagination.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/161074-the-future-of-ray-tracing-reviewed-caustics-r2500-accelerator-finally-moves-us-towards-real-time-ray-tracing

[MEDIA=vimeo]59618981[/MEDIA] [MEDIA=vimeo]59512797[/MEDIA]
I don't think it was ever really available though, I know they made a card, but it was only ever available to a few developers afaik.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment