AMD Second-generation Ryzen "Pinnacle Ridge" Confirmed to Support AM4

[RejZoR]

@RejZoR Good old praising Vega and RyZen while using Intel and just bought a 1080Ti. Very convincing, bro.

Just because I have NVIDIA that doens't mean it's not shit. Which can be evident from endless bitching about it. Don't have any arguments over 5820K though. It's a good CPU. AMD didn't have anything to offer at the time. Ryzen however is a good choice today. And since this was a long term investment, if 5 years down the path AMD will have something decent in the offerings, I'll probably take that. I don't see a reason why someone with Intel is not allowed to compliment AMD if they have good products.

 

[cyrand]

I always see people make a big deal about needing new motherboard for upgrading CPU. I wonder how many people actually do this. I have built every computer I ever owned over the past ~20 years now. I have upgraded ram,GPU,HDD/SSD but in all that time never needed to upgrade a CPU while not also wanting stuff that my current motherboard did not have. Like newer version of ram, or new PCI-e version, or something else that simply a new CPU would not provide.

My experience is the features of my motherboard become outdated faster then my need for a new CPU therefore it just never seem important to me that AMD or Intel kept backward compatibility on there motherboards.

 

[iO]

Great way to gain back market share and regain trust. But, Pinnacle better be a tangible improvement or this whole strategy won't work.

Shouldnt be too hard. Bulldozer to Piledriver was a ~15% performance gain and that was with just some tweaks of the same Orochi die on the same process.

Now add in some 5-10% higher clocks from the "12nm shrink" and you got a pretty nice CPU.

 

[TheGuruStud]

Not enough pins in the socket? Unless they do an Intel and make a new chipset with more PCIe lanes, which will hopefully use a PCIe 3.0 bridge next time around. Then again, we don't know if they have extra capacity or not to add something like four more PCIe lanes to the socket, but it doesn't seem too likely.



Well, it's already limiting for me, as I've got an NVMe M.2 drive and can't add another one to my system unless I want to put in a PCIe 2.0 slot. So yes, it is a big deal for some of us.

THREADRIPPAH! I'm sure you can statistically round the number of people with/wanting more than one nvme down to zero. It's not like more lanes is going to be any priority when they actually did make an HEDT platform.

Just because I have NVIDIA that doens't mean it's not shit. Which can be evident from endless bitching about it. Don't have any arguments over 5820K though. It's a good CPU. AMD didn't have anything to offer at the time. Ryzen however is a good choice today. And since this was a long term investment, if 5 years down the path AMD will have something decent in the offerings, I'll probably take that. I don't see a reason why someone with Intel is not allowed to compliment AMD if they have good products.

It destroys their intel is superior illusion?

 

[Imsochobo]

I thought AMD themselves had said they are going to stick with AM4 until release of DDR5.

They could do phenom II style, where two memory controllers exist for the first revision and I loved it!
I have a Phenom II on an Geforce 2 TI on AGP system, beat that backwards comp-ability!

on the other side I hope they bring out the 4 lost pci-e lanes they've been hiding which requires new socket pinout.
Am1-AM2-AM3 is practically the same just modified it slightly to prevent users from inserting into wrong socket (added or removed a pin)

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I always see people make a big deal about needing new motherboard for upgrading CPU. I wonder how many people actually do this. I have built every computer I ever owned over the past ~20 years now. I have upgraded ram,GPU,HDD/SSD but in all that time never needed to upgrade a CPU while not also wanting stuff that my current motherboard did not have. Like newer version of ram, or new PCI-e version, or something else that simply a new CPU would not provide.

My experience is the features of my motherboard become outdated faster then my need for a new CPU therefore it just never seem important to me that AMD or Intel kept backward compatibility on there motherboards.

See the 4,1 Mac Pro, which shipped with 45nm quad core Xeons. You could flash that model to 5,1 and then upgrade to 32nm 6 core Xeons (which also supported 1333 DDR3). It was quite an investment, but one could move from 2 x 4C/8T to 2 x 6C/12T without shelling out for the 5,1. An odd example, but back in its day, it was a significant upgrade.

Back when I was right out of college and had limited funds, I used to only upgrade one part at a time. I recall dropping my Dothan 800mhz into a new motherboard that supported the Athlon XP and DDR. When the Athlon XPs got cheaper, I bought one and saw a noticeable performance gain. Granted, today, there isn't as much incentive to upgrade one part at a time other than the GPU, since typically the higher end CPUs mostly offer more cores to gain performance, but those gains are only realized in specific scenarios. In the single (and even dual) core days, the difference was very noticeable across the board.

 

[EarthDog]

Well, for those looking to ride out a mobo for several years, I hope nothing new comes out you need or want.

Look at amd the last couple of years... m.2 32 gbps? Usb3.1 10 gbps? Pcie 3.0? Ddr4?

Some pretty big things there for a lot of people.

It just depends on the specific user and if they can or want to live without those (any new) features... or pay to add them via addin cards... which then starts biting into any 'savings' from having to buy another mobo.

Personally, id rather buy a new mobo with all the features than stuff my PC with AICs...to each their own.

 

[R0H1T]

I always see people make a big deal about needing new motherboard for upgrading CPU. I wonder how many people actually do this. I have built every computer I ever owned over the past ~20 years now. I have upgraded ram,GPU,HDD/SSD but in all that time never needed to upgrade a CPU while not also wanting stuff that my current motherboard did not have. Like newer version of ram, or new PCI-e version, or something else that simply a new CPU would not provide.

My experience is the features of my motherboard become outdated faster then my need for a new CPU therefore it just never seem important to me that AMD or Intel kept backward compatibility on there motherboards.

Apart from NVMe & DDR4 what new feature have you seen in the last 2+ years that compels you to upgrade your mobo? Having a choice to keep the same mobo, also memory at times, & upgrade to a better CPU down the road is something that many of us expect from Intel, just like AMD's done in the past.

Also AMD has a superior design now with the SoC style Ryzen, Intel on the other hand is still vastly limited by DMI on their desktop chipsets.

 

[T1beriu]

just 6-8 older PCI-Express gen 2.0 general purpose lanes (while Intel chipsets put out up to 24 gen 3.0 lanes).

You might want to refresh your knowledge about that.

 

[EarthDog]

You might want to refresh your knowledge about that.

And you may want to link the info instead of just being snarky.

 

[nemesis.ie]

"address 300-series chipset's main shortcoming, just 6-8 older PCI-Express gen 2.0 general purpose lanes (while Intel chipsets put out up to 24 gen 3.0 lanes)."

Is this as bad as it looks at the moment? How much bandwidth do those Intel boards have connecting to the CPU? Much less than 24 3.0 lanes I suspect?

On the flip side, the AM4 platform has 24 lanes from the CPU which in many cases is better via the chipset. You can at least have one M.2 directly attached to the CPU.

I think the wording should be clarified a bit so folks don't forget about the extra CPU lanes.

Adding a beefier chipset wouldn't be a bad thing though.

 

[hat]

Oh really? Wasn't AMD selling FM and AM platforms simultaneously? :-D

To be honest I never followed up on the FM series. It seemed to me like a really cheap, low power solution for your Grandma or your HTPC or something. Looking it up they don't seem exactly cheap either... I wonder what purpose this socket is supposed to serve? Maybe I was remembering something else I saw.

In any case, my comment wasn't about selling multiple platforms at the same time, it was about the longevity and backwards compatibility of at least the AM2 socket on up.

 

[xkm1948]

Just because I have NVIDIA that doens't mean it's not shit. Which can be evident from endless bitching about it. Don't have any arguments over 5820K though. It's a good CPU. AMD didn't have anything to offer at the time. Ryzen however is a good choice today. And since this was a long term investment, if 5 years down the path AMD will have something decent in the offerings, I'll probably take that. I don't see a reason why someone with Intel is not allowed to compliment AMD if they have good products.

Offer still stands man, trading my AmD GPU for your shitty 1080Ti. Let me know!

 

[Vayra86]

Shouldnt be too hard. Bulldozer to Piledriver was a ~15% performance gain and that was with just some tweaks of the same Orochi die on the same process.

Now add in some 5-10% higher clocks from the "12nm shrink" and you got a pretty nice CPU.

Back then Intel was also adding 10% IPC per gen and Bulldozer was notoriously shitty. So yes, in that day and age, 15% gain is very well doable. Today? Doubtful.

 

[The Quim Reaper]

Ryzen at 4.5Ghz with a 5-10% IPC gain would make them a very compelling alternative to a Coffee Lake build.

...Assuming they don't get greedy and start to jack up the prices.

 

[notb]

Intel sells HEDT and Mainstream at the same time. Isnt that APU and 'Mainstream'?

Different segmentation.

Intel's mainstream socket really covers mainstream needs: from basic multimedia to gaming / advanced use. And they've all had iGPU for years.
Before AM4 this was not true for AMD. One socket was for APUs, the other one was for more powerful CPUs (without iGPU). So you couldn't easily move between these segments.
And it's not really something I came up with. Both AMD and reviewers made a huge fuss about unification of these 2 lines in one platform.

 

[cyrand]

Apart from NVMe & DDR4 what new feature have you seen in the last 2+ years that compels you to upgrade your mobo? Having a choice to keep the same mobo, also memory at times, & upgrade to a better CPU down the road is something that many of us expect from Intel, just like AMD's done in the past.

I guess it a matter of what you want. I never found a reason to spend money on a new CPU after 2 years. Usually it 4-5 years before am ready for a new cpu and by that time I usually want a newer chipset then my current motherboard.

 

[notb]

Apart from NVMe & DDR4 what new feature have you seen in the last 2+ years that compels you to upgrade your mobo?

NVMe and DDR4 are not enough?
I'd add: USB 3.1 (Gen 2) including Thunderbolt and USB-C.
Generally speaking, "new features" is not the only factor. It's also about typical evolution: interfaces, minor compatibility issues - small things that add up.
Also more and more motherboards have WiFi/BT (finally!).

 

[RejZoR]

Also, Stoney Ridge based on Bulldozer tech is anything but slow. They increased the clock dramatically as well as lower consumption and improved IPC, making these excel at single threaded performance (given they are 28nm chips). Power consumption is also down to 15W at highest clocks. It's just a real shame they can't chop these down to 14nm and make them like 7W parts. That would make them interested despite older architecture. I'd still prefer Ryzen based low end parts, but we can't have it all, can we...

 

[notb]

To be honest I never followed up on the FM series. It seemed to me like a really cheap, low power solution for your Grandma or your HTPC or something.

What's wrong with "Grandma or HTPC"?
I've just given my old PC to my grandfather.

Looking it up they don't seem exactly cheap either... I wonder what purpose this socket is supposed to serve? Maybe I was remembering something else I saw.

Purpose was pretty simple. It was made with APUs in mind. AM CPUs didn't have iGPU.
In other words: FM was for those 90% of buyers who are actually responsible for the financial result. But it was a flop... and here we are few years later: most people on the planet don't know (or don't remember) what AMD is.

In any case, my comment wasn't about selling multiple platforms at the same time, it was about the longevity and backwards compatibility of at least the AM2 socket on up.

AM2 longevity was rubbish. It was released in 2006 and in 2007 we already got AM2+, which wasn't fully compatible (many mobos didn't get a BIOS update).
AM3 came 3 years later - in 2009.

By comparison, Intel's mainstream socket of the period (775) lasted from 2004 to 2009.

 

[hat]

What's wrong with "Grandma or HTPC"?
I've just given my old PC to my grandfather.

nothing

Purpose was pretty simple. It was made with APUs in mind. AM CPUs didn't have iGPU.
In other words: FM was for those 90% of buyers who are actually responsible for the financial result. But it was a flop... and here we are few years later: most people on the planet don't know (or don't remember) what AMD is.

And most people think i7 means 7 cores. Most people just aren't too well informed or don't care very much about PC hardware.

AM2 longevity was rubbish. It was released in 2006 and in 2007 we already got AM2+, which wasn't fully compatible (many mobos didn't get a BIOS update).
AM3 came 3 years later - in 2009.

By comparison, Intel's mainstream socket of the period (775) lasted from 2004 to 2009.

Maybe AM2 wasn't around too long... but it was at least forwards compatible. I don't think it was AMD's fault that those mobo manufacturers were reluctant to release a BIOS update for the new processors.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

AM2 longevity was rubbish. It was released in 2006 and in 2007 we already got AM2+, which wasn't fully compatible (many mobos didn't get a BIOS update).
AM3 came 3 years later - in 2009.

By comparison, Intel's mainstream socket of the period (775) lasted from 2004 to 2009.

775 is not really much better of an example. Yes, the socket stayed the same, but the netburst Pentiums and Celerons didn't play nicely with the Core series. Most boards would either take one or the other, unless a BIOS update added support (and I don't believe that was very common). 775 was introduced with the awful Prescott series, and I suspect Intel kept the socket/cooler setup in an effort to keep their OEM partners committed while they rolled out something better. That was the last time AMD really caught Intel with its pants down. Intel had to scramble, dumping Netburst and scaling their mobile CPU (Yonah) architecture up to desktop class. By the time Intel had an answer for AMD with the IMC, they were transitioning to 1366.

 

[eidairaman1]

I always see people make a big deal about needing new motherboard for upgrading CPU. I wonder how many people actually do this. I have built every computer I ever owned over the past ~20 years now. I have upgraded ram,GPU,HDD/SSD but in all that time never needed to upgrade a CPU while not also wanting stuff that my current motherboard did not have. Like newer version of ram, or new PCI-e version, or something else that simply a new CPU would not provide.

My experience is the features of my motherboard become outdated faster then my need for a new CPU therefore it just never seem important to me that AMD or Intel kept backward compatibility on there motherboards.

It opens up options across pricing. Also a CPU drop in means no having to reinstall drivers etc.

 

[newtekie1]

Sadly this doesn't look like it's something that can or will be addressed until we have a new socket now, so anyone with an AM4 system is going to be slightly limited to what they can stick in their system. Ok, 10Gbps Ethernet can still go via the chipset, but might be a bottlenecked slightly, but other things will be far too limited to go through there.

This is completely untrue. Intel's link to the PCH is 3.94GB/s, it essentially uses a PCI-E 3.0 x4 link to the PCH. AM4's link is the same thing, with the same bandwidth. Intel's PCH not only does 24 extra PCI-E 3.0 lanes, but it also handles all the SATA ports.

There is no reason AMD can't add more PCI-E lanes as well as a bigger SATA controller to their chipset without any need to change the socket.

Intel sells HEDT and Mainstream at the same time. Isnt that APU and 'Mainstream'?

Hell, AMD had 3 sockets at the same exact time. AM1, AM3+ and FM2+.

 

[Hood]

I always see people make a big deal about needing new motherboard for upgrading CPU. I wonder how many people actually do this. I have built every computer I ever owned over the past ~20 years now. I have upgraded ram,GPU,HDD/SSD but in all that time never needed to upgrade a CPU while not also wanting stuff that my current motherboard did not have. Like newer version of ram, or new PCI-e version, or something else that simply a new CPU would not provide.

My experience is the features of my motherboard become outdated faster then my need for a new CPU therefore it just never seem important to me that AMD or Intel kept backward compatibility on there motherboards.

Good points. The people bitching are mostly AMD users (they're usually budget-limited, or they'd buy Intel). Amd users feel the need for a new CPU the minute they build a system, because they don't buy top parts, and are hoping for a pencil mod to magically make their CPU twice as fast for free! The frequent motherboard change is one of the strengths of Intel, not a weakness at all. Intel users want top performance, not a bargain deal. Using a board for multiple generations is just another compromise, sacrificing performance or connectivity just to save a few bucks. I always sold my old Intel parts as a working system, and that covered half to 2/3 the cost of the new rig, and now all my friends have better gaming rigs for a lower price, and free lifetime support (parts extra!).