Monday, January 10th 2022

AMD Wanting to Time Launch of AM5 Platform with DDR5 Availability

It would seem that AMD is concerned about DDR5 memory availability in the market, at least based on an interview that Tom's Hardware had with David McAfee, the Corporate VP and GM of the Client Channel business at AMD. It's not just about availability it seems, but also pricing, as McAfee is quoted saying "One of the dynamics that we do think about a great deal is how and when to introduce that AM5 ecosystem and ensure that the DDR5 supply, as well as pricing of DDR5 memory, is mature and something that's easily attainable for an end-user".

With the current issues that the DRAM module makers are experiencing, with both staff issues related to the pandemic and the PMIC shortage some are having, the question is how long it'll take until there's a steady supply of DDR5 modules in the market, at a reasonable price point. We obviously don't know what kind of DRAM speeds AMD is aiming for either, although it's unlikely that the company is looking at something faster than JEDEC spec at this point in time, even though we expect faster speeds will also be supported. Outside of the US, it seems like a cheap stick of 8 GB of DDR5 memory is going for around the US$100 mark (€89) or roughly four times that of a similar DDR4 stick. Crucial in the US is offering a single 8 GB stick for US$68, with a 16 GB stick costing the same as a pair of 8 GB sticks, US$137. This is unlikely to be the kind of price point AMD is hoping for and most DDR5 memory modules are a lot more expensive.
McAfee continues "And so there may be other forces beyond the product itself that slow down or meter the introduction of APUs into that AM5 socket. You know, we do expect that to be an enthusiast-first introduction. And I think we're going to have to watch very carefully just how the DDR5 transition takes place and how quickly both supply and prices come in line to make it more affordable for a mainstream consumer that might be more interested in making a product in that socket." Although APUs are expected to gain more from the increased memory performance of DDR5 than CPUs, due to the integrated GPU getting more bandwidth compared to when paired with DDR4 memory, it looks like they might take longer to make an appearance than in the past from AMD, if DDR5 pricing and availability isn't right.

However, unlike Intel's Alder Lake, it doesn't seem like AMD's AM5 platform has an option to use DDR4 memory, which could be the achilles heel for the platform as a whole. Likewise, the Ryzen 6000 series of mobile APUs might also end up suffering, although AMD claims that its partners are "well-positioned" when it comes to supply of DDR5 and LPDDR5 for mobile products. Time will tell how things play out, but it looks like AMD might have painted itself into a corner, if supply and pricing doesn't improve in the next six to 12 months.
Source: Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

109 Comments on AMD Wanting to Time Launch of AM5 Platform with DDR5 Availability

#101
Assimilator
EatingDirtYou must have a short memory, but when Zen 3 released, you could barely find a single Zen 3 CPU for the 4-6 months. 5900x's have gone out of stock on amazon as recently as early December, and 5600x's as recently as October. They didn't go into the low-end market simply because they don't have the capacity in the foundries, so naturally they focused on the higher margin products.
bugAgreed on everything but the last part. There's a supply shortage going on, focusing on higher margin SKUs is common sense, not greed.
(I know the current shortage started way after Zen, but everything since Zen has been built on cutting edge nodes, so it was supply constrained anyway.)
Nothing forced AMD to concentrate on producing only higher-end SKUs, particularly in earlier generations where there were no supply shortages.
kapone32I see from this post (and others) that you are not living in the real world. The 5300G in 2022? If you want to blame anyone blame Team Green for killing the budget market. You do realize that you qualified the 12100 referencing that it supports DDR5 which is in no way budget. The 5600X is a great CPU but has no IGPU. The 5600G is great but you missed the reason. As i said before you can set the Frame buffer to 16GB of DDR4 directly into the APU. You also forgot that I mentioned that RDNA2 is coming to the APUs. Regardless of how you may feel Intel cannot hold a candle to AMD if they drop RDNA2 (They can barely keep up to Vega). That budget crowd you are talking about will sing all day with their 1080P Laptop with no DGPU but FSR, 24 hour battery life and whatever other software improvements AMD are (purportedly) working on. It would seem that a lot of people are trying to pigeon hole AMD into Intel's way of Corporate life. AMD is not looking at maximizing profits but they also do not need the "budget" moniker attached to their processors especially if they are high performing. When is the last time you saw an Intel exec on PCworld's livestream? Are you really going to bring up the exhaustive argument of (percieved loss of performance) running PCIE 3.0 on a GPU that is connected driectly to the CPU, Memory Controller and Power delivery right on the Chip? Before you wax on though think about this a 5800X is 70 to 80% higher in performance vs a 1800X. Intel only needed one generation to achieve that but 11th Gen was more of the same and they got smacked for it so they give us 12th Gen that is secretly a power hog with main stream boards that rival HEDT MBs in VRM design and capability. I have a 5950X and am loving it but my 5600G using 16GB of Frame Buffer gives me a consistent 100 FPS in Sleeping Dogs (Not the Definitive edition) at 1080P medium and I love that too. I ask you in a world where a budget GPU is $600 Canadian vs $399 for the top end just a few years ago. How the 5600G at 349 and 5700G at 399 are mid range. I bet you the 5600G is already 80 to 100% faster than a 3400G.

The last point I will make is take a 5600G and a 12100 yourself and Game with the IGPU and then tell me which is better in terms of software support and features,
This post is one of the greatest examples of whataboutism and twisting facts to suit a narrative that I've ever seen.

Firstly, I never mentioned DDR5 in relation to low-end ADL, precisely because it's irrelevant at this time. But in terms of future-proofing that support it's obviously a good thing - a fact that you then attempt to parlay into a negative.

You then go on a tangent about the 5600G and its 16GB framebuffer and RDNA2 in future APUs. NOBODY. CARES. Consumers don't want to pay through the nose for the 5600G today and they can't buy these mythical future APUs today. Sure, a 12100's iGPU isn't going to perform on the same level as a 5600G's, but for most consumers that's a moot point.

You then go on a further tangent about how PCIe bandwidth doesn't matter. I never said it did, what I stated was that PCIe 4.0 was a feature artificially and unnecessarily cut from the 5000-class APUs, whereas Intel has not made such market-segmenting cuts on even their lowest-end products.

Then you claim "a 5800X is 70 to 80% higher in performance vs a 1800X" which is a flat out lie.

Next you go rabbiting on about how 11th gen Intel was a scam (agreed) and how 12th gen Intel is a scam because of higher power draw and blah, blah, blah. The 12100 pulls less power than either the 5800 or the 5600X so you're wrong (again) there, and most consumers don't care about power consumption anyway because it's not something they think about when they're shopping. What they care is that they see an Intel CPU for under half the cost of its would-be competitor from AMD, and for them that's a no-brainer.

Moving on we have the ridiculous claim that because 5600G and 5700G are cheaper than a dGPU they're somehow not mid-range. I'm not even going to dignify this with a response.

And finally, the nebulous claim of better "software support and features" with the 5600G. This is the exact kind of useless marketing speak I'd expect from someone who has no facts to back up their claims. It's an utterly fact-devoid utterance that has zero value, the kind of pointless word salad I'd expect from the former President of the USA.
Posted on Reply
#102
TheoneandonlyMrK
AssimilatorNothing forced AMD to concentrate on producing only higher-end SKUs, particularly in earlier generations where there were no supply shortages.

This post is one of the greatest examples of whataboutism and twisting facts to suit a narrative that I've ever seen.

Firstly, I never mentioned DDR5 in relation to low-end ADL, precisely because it's irrelevant at this time. But in terms of future-proofing that support it's obviously a good thing - a fact that you then attempt to parlay into a negative.

You then go on a tangent about the 5600G and its 16GB framebuffer and RDNA2 in future APUs. NOBODY. CARES. Consumers don't want to pay through the nose for the 5600G today and they can't buy these mythical future APUs today. Sure, a 12100's iGPU isn't going to perform on the same level as a 5600G's, but for most consumers that's a moot point.

You then go on a further tangent about how PCIe bandwidth doesn't matter. I never said it did, what I stated was that PCIe 4.0 was a feature artificially and unnecessarily cut from the 5000-class APUs, whereas Intel has not made such market-segmenting cuts on even their lowest-end products.

Then you claim "a 5800X is 70 to 80% higher in performance vs a 1800X" which is a flat out lie.

Next you go rabbiting on about how 11th gen Intel was a scam (agreed) and how 12th gen Intel is a scam because of higher power draw and blah, blah, blah. The 12100 pulls less power than either the 5800 or the 5600X so you're wrong (again) there, and most consumers don't care about power consumption anyway because it's not something they think about when they're shopping. What they care is that they see an Intel CPU for under half the cost of its would-be competitor from AMD, and for them that's a no-brainer.

Moving on we have the ridiculous claim that because 5600G and 5700G are cheaper than a dGPU they're somehow not mid-range. I'm not even going to dignify this with a response.

And finally, the nebulous claim of better "software support and features" with the 5600G. This is the exact kind of useless marketing speak I'd expect from someone who has no facts to back up their claims. It's an utterly fact-devoid utterance that has zero value, the kind of pointless word salad I'd expect from the former President of the USA.
If you tried to game on Xe verses Vega 11 the support you don't know about would become apparent.
Features I'm willing to agree on as largely moot.

I don't disagree with most of your post but it is clearly slanted towards a reasonably financed low to mid range gamer who can find a GPU they can afford, 4Gb 1650s(hmnn old as shit and more than when new out) are going for £250 here, so entry level gaming is going to be an issue with your argument for the foreseeable future.

There are other perspectives is all I'm trying to say.
Posted on Reply
#103
kapone32
AssimilatorNothing forced AMD to concentrate on producing only higher-end SKUs, particularly in earlier generations where there were no supply shortages.

This post is one of the greatest examples of whataboutism and twisting facts to suit a narrative that I've ever seen.

Firstly, I never mentioned DDR5 in relation to low-end ADL, precisely because it's irrelevant at this time. But in terms of future-proofing that support it's obviously a good thing - a fact that you then attempt to parlay into a negative.

You then go on a tangent about the 5600G and its 16GB framebuffer and RDNA2 in future APUs. NOBODY. CARES. Consumers don't want to pay through the nose for the 5600G today and they can't buy these mythical future APUs today. Sure, a 12100's iGPU isn't going to perform on the same level as a 5600G's, but for most consumers that's a moot point.

You then go on a further tangent about how PCIe bandwidth doesn't matter. I never said it did, what I stated was that PCIe 4.0 was a feature artificially and unnecessarily cut from the 5000-class APUs, whereas Intel has not made such market-segmenting cuts on even their lowest-end products.

Then you claim "a 5800X is 70 to 80% higher in performance vs a 1800X" which is a flat out lie.

Next you go rabbiting on about how 11th gen Intel was a scam (agreed) and how 12th gen Intel is a scam because of higher power draw and blah, blah, blah. The 12100 pulls less power than either the 5800 or the 5600X so you're wrong (again) there, and most consumers don't care about power consumption anyway because it's not something they think about when they're shopping. What they care is that they see an Intel CPU for under half the cost of its would-be competitor from AMD, and for them that's a no-brainer.

Moving on we have the ridiculous claim that because 5600G and 5700G are cheaper than a dGPU they're somehow not mid-range. I'm not even going to dignify this with a response.

And finally, the nebulous claim of better "software support and features" with the 5600G. This is the exact kind of useless marketing speak I'd expect from someone who has no facts to back up their claims. It's an utterly fact-devoid utterance that has zero value, the kind of pointless word salad I'd expect from the former President of the USA.
Well I was entertained by your opinions until you compared me to that IDIOT. Moving on. "And finally, the nebulous claim of better "software support and features" with the 5600G." I have a 5600G and if you can show me better Graphics software that Intel has vs AMD Radeon Software i will stop referencing it. Did you also know that you can enable Rebar in the BIOS with the 5600G? FSR is also fully supported. Did you also know that the overlay shows your GPU, CPU, Power draw, Temps, voltage and other data just by enabling it in Radeon software without needing to install FRAPS or MSI afterburner or another background program.

"Then you claim "a 5800X is 70 to 80% higher in performance vs a 1800X" which is a flat out lie". I have worked with 1700, 2600, 3600x,3400Gx,3300X,3100,5600x,5900x,5950x,1900x and 2920x. So I can speak about my experiences with AMD CPUs. The 1700-1800 could not go past 4.1 GHZ the 2600 could do 4.3 GHZ, the 3600 could 4.5GHZ, the 5600X could do 4.65 GHz, the 5900X could do 4.9 GHZ the 5950x can do 5.2 GHZ all single core but the all core clock speed from 1800 to 5800 is about 4.015 to 4.6 GHZ (Windows Task Manager). Memory support was stabilizied by 2nd Gen but 5000 series support OC {Not Officially) 4000MHZ vs the 1000 series 2933MHZ as 3200 was a lottery. The IPC gain from each generation was about 18% (As per AMD and Firestrike) which is why the 5950x trounces the 1950X in most tasks even though it is bandwidth starved in comparison (funnily enough PCIe and DDR bandwidth).Ryzen CPUs scale with clock speed of the RAM is not a lie is it? If you take all of that into account is my assertion based on my own experience a lie?

"You then go on a tangent about the 5600G and its 16GB framebuffer and RDNA2 in future APUs. NOBODY. CARES". The 3400G has a maximum frame buffer of 2GB. While you may say today that nobody cares "nebulous" programs like the "Features" in AMD Software are more greatly enjoyed with a 16GB frame buffer vs 2GB. As far as I can see Games are getting bigger and bigger so that frame buffer change alone is enough for anyone who has a Previous Gen Ryzen APU to upgrade to the current Gen but more importantly the next Generation of chips. RDNA2 is not a theory The 6800XT is as fast as 2 Vega 64s in crossfire in Firestrike. What does that mean? It means that if you can't afford a $600 GPU you can still enjoy Gaming and all the features that are available now and announced at CES that are coming. This is not the era of 7950s or 880s for $199. There is no enjoyable GPU to add to these builds in the $99-199 range. So if the 5600G GPU/CPU combo costs $359 vs a 12100 and GT1030 costs......well I can't say because it's not available in Canada but I expect it will probably be $199 or $229 because 12th Gen is expensive here (unless you buy a bundle) the 1030 is not an enjoyable GPU for $179. If I was the only person in the world enjoying a 5600G I would be sad though.

"You then go on a further tangent about how PCIe bandwidth doesn't matter. I never said it did, what I stated was that PCIe 4.0 was a feature artificially and unnecessarily cut from the 5000-class APUs, whereas Intel has not made such market-segmenting cuts on even their lowest-end products":
Let's keep in mind that we are talking about budget. Let's also keep in mind that daily tasks show no difference between PCIe speeds and look at the lowest cost of a PCIe 3.0 drive vs a 4.0 device will be about 35-40% (sales excluded). as time goes on this argument should deepen further for the gap to increase.

Having said all of that common sense dictates that a Gaming laptop is probably the least expensive way to get into high refresh rate Gaming and right now a 10th Gen laptop with a RTX card is the consistently least expensive but don't go below the 3060 and that is the truth. Even prebuilds are getting stupidly priced.
Posted on Reply
#104
trsttte
Did AMD took advantage of the current market? Yes, ofc, like any company would, but go ahead and find a better cpu+gpu than the 5600g for it's price, I'll wait.

And want to talk about only higher end options in previous years? Lol, what's the need for lower end options when you can buy the previous gen higher end for similar prices (ex: couple months after Zen2 launched you could buy a 2700/2700x (~160€) for a similar price to what the 3300x launched much later on (130€))

Comparing prices today is hard because the market is completely fucked but looking back to better days and arguing AMD didn't or doesn't have budget options just shows you didn't/don't know where to look.
Posted on Reply
#105
chrcoluk
TiggerI heard of people buying ADL DDR5 boards and end up having to sell it to get a DDR4 ADL board. Hopefully The DDR5 situation will be better by the time they "hope" to release the AM5 platform though there is no guarantee. I don't regret getting a DDR4 board for my ADL at all, can always switch later if it's viable.
Introducing a new tech in an era of manufacturing crisis I guess wasn't the best idea. :)
Posted on Reply
#106
Assimilator
trsttteLol, what's the need for lower end options when you can buy the previous gen higher end for similar prices (ex: couple months after Zen2 launched you could buy a 2700/2700x (~160€) for a similar price to what the 3300x launched much later on (130€))
Most people don't buy computer parts second-hand. So congratulations for trying to move the goalposts, but sorry you failed.
Posted on Reply
#107
bug
AssimilatorMost people don't buy computer parts second-hand. So congratulations for trying to move the goalposts, but sorry you failed.
Following that train of thought, companies should only ever bother releasing high-end. You need a CPU just good enough for booting Windows and browsing the Internet? Get a Core i9-7900X or first gen Threadripper! :P

But again, when supply isn't enough, it's only common to give the boot to low-end parts first. Keep in mind AMD has actually released lower specced parts. But only in OEM form, because they buy in bulk, so there's still some hefty profit to be made there.
Posted on Reply
#108
trsttte
AssimilatorMost people don't buy computer parts second-hand. So congratulations for trying to move the goalposts, but sorry you failed.
I'm talking regular retail prices, zen+ was extremely cheap after zen 2 launched and a 2700x was cheaper than a 3600. In gaming the extra single thread speed of zen2 gives the edge to the 3600 but on productivity the 2700x extra cores compensate the ipc gains easily and it even packs a better cooler.

Like I said, there's no reason to launch lower end parts (ex. the 3300x) when you can discount the older gen parts, which budget oriented users will look at. Right now, weren't for the current market situation the same would happen - you could be buying higher end zen2 parts (they're even relaunching Ryzen 4000 on the desktop to unload old stock apparently) for cheaper than the zen3, what's the need for a ryzen 5300 or 5100 then!? Ofc the market is out of wack, but that's not amd's fault, they're just profiteering like everyone else.

In the future this will be more and more the case, it makes little sense to build a super cheap custom desktop when small "nuc"-like small pc offer better performance for cheaper. For office drones doing accounting or whatever that barely needs any compute performance this is even more the case, they can even vesa mount the computers to the displays.
bugFollowing that train of thought, companies should only ever bother releasing high-end. You need a CPU just good enough for booting Windows and browsing the Internet? Get a Core i9-7900X or first gen Threadripper! :p

But again, when supply isn't enough, it's only common to give the boot to low-end parts first. Keep in mind AMD has actually released lower specced parts. But only in OEM form, because they buy in bulk, so there's still some hefty profit to be made there.
I'm assuming that's more directed at me. Well the 3300x/3100 launched on may 2020 - early days of the pandemic when everyone and their dog needed a computer. I wouldn't fault AMD too much for not being able to properly keep the thing in stock. Before that (late 2019 irc) they launched the 1600AF (rebranded 2600) for 85$ (i don't feel like searching for a quote in € right now).

They have launched budget options in the past and will certainly do so again in the future. Like usual those options won't make the most sense compared to previous gen. stuff.
Posted on Reply
#109
kapone32
AssimilatorMost people don't buy computer parts second-hand. So congratulations for trying to move the goalposts, but sorry you failed.
You should have prefaced that with, it should have been, because no one is an expert on the current market. I would also say that the GPU market bucks that sentiment as well. Regardless of what Youtube says the 3600 is a great Gaming CPU. Also because of platform it (you can get B450 boards for $69 or even A320 with the coming AGESA update) cannot be beat in terms of value.
It is also allows for a great way to get into Gaming and take advantage of all AMD hardware with a 6600 which is around $600 Canadian. That means that using that or a 10400F (about the same price) would net you the same performance but AMD is working hard on leveraging the CPU/GPU Combination in current PCs. Regardless of what you say 12th Gen is for early adopters and it will probably be June/July before the platform is stabilized. DIY is in the realm of the old way of thinking and current (Ryzen/10 Gen +) Gaming laptops are powerful enough to deliver a compelling experience for Gaming at a decent price. As an example there was a 11400 laptop with a 3060 for $1399 Canadian on Newegg last week.
Step out of your Intel tent for a minute a take a look around. There are millions of AM4 motherboards in the real world with 27 different combinations of CPU/APU to use with the platform which in my eyes creates a great potential used market when AM5 launches. It is only because of Intel's practices that the same has never existed before. Having said Intel based pre built PCs sell faster than AMD and I9 or I7 in the listings do get a lot of views..
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment