Anyone else disappointed with the AMD 3D-Vcache reveal?

[cst1992]

Only a 5800X refresh is unveiled - 5800X3D - which will rival the i9 12900K.

For people like me who were waiting for an update to the 5600X at the $300-$350 price point, this is a disappointment. On top of this, it seems that even for the 5800X3D I'll have to wait till June.
Not to mention it'll be priced competitively to the 12900K, which means paying at least $700.

Boo. I guess it's better then to either get a 5600X or one of the AM5 chips.

 

[ixi]

Only a 5800X refresh is unveiled - 5800X3D - which will rival the i9 12900K.

For people like me who were waiting for an update to the 5600X at the $300-$350 price point, this is a disappointment. On top of this, it seems that even for the 5800X3D I'll have to wait till June.
Not to mention it'll be priced competitively to the 12900K, which means paying at least $700.

Boo. I guess it's better then to either get a 5600X or one of the AM5 chips.

We need to wait and see. If amd will releas only 5800x with 3D then they shot them self in the ass.

AM5 > 3D caching.

 

[EzioAs]

If amd will releas only 5800x with 3D then they shot them self in the ass.

AM5 > 3D caching.

These two statements contradicts themselves.

If AMD is prioritizing AM5/Zen 4 over AM4 (which from a corporate standpoint, they probably are doing so), then it totally makes sense to shift resources, production and consumer focus on a newer platform (where consumers will have to spend more) instead of letting people spend less upgrading one single thing. Plus, if their slides are anything to go by, AMD probably doesn't feel the need to put so much pressure over Intel in such little time because the single Ryzen 7 5800X3D is probably enough to take back the gaming performance crown .

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I think the main gains from the increase cache is gaming performance currently nothing above the 5800X makes a lot of sense for gaming so to me at least this launch makes sense for them. Also looking at how the clocks seem to be dropping with this implementation having two higher end chips that perform worse in some task vs their non vcache counter parts but are better at gaming probably doesn't make a lot of sense. I'm actually glad AMD didn't just limit this to one halo product sku like a 5950X3D for 1k or some shit....


I guess it will all make more sense when reviewers get these in to validate their performance. The key will be pricing if this chip cost as much as a 5900X then its a fail regardless of how it performs in gaming.

 

[tabascosauz]

For people like me who were waiting for an update to the 5600X at the $300-$350 price point, this is a disappointment. On top of this, it seems that even for the 5800X3D I'll have to wait till June.
Not to mention it'll be priced competitively to the 12900K, which means paying at least $700.

Boo. I guess it's better then to either get a 5600X or one of the AM5 chips.

If you took the ambitious leaks at face value then I could see why it would be a surprise. Nothing has changed with chiplet Zen 3 except for the addition of cache, and this refresh doesn't get that much time on the market. Bottom line is, 2022 has always belonged to AM5 if AMD intends to stay on track.

Rocket Lake was also in the same boat timeline-wise, but OEM's needed new stuff, so they had to release a [relatively] full i5/i7/i9 lineup as a stopgap. But otherwise, same deal.

The -200MHz boost clock deficit feels like AMD is trying to present the 5800X3D only as a technology demonstrator only.

My concern is more over what the -200MHz means. Is the L3 that power-hungry that it digs into the CCD power? Are they trying to limit the 5800X's performance on purpose (not likely, Zen 3 doesn't scale much on freq in games)? Or does the 3D cache + thermal spacer over the core area cause a thermals problem over the 5800X's already poor thermals (so far L3 seems to run relatively cool on my 5900X since HWInfo added sensors)? That might be really telling about how AM5 behaves thermally.

 

[R0H1T]

Easy peasy, lower clocks would probably mean (better) sustained performance & obviously more cache takes more power! How much ~ anyone's guess atm, but I'm really interested in seeing how it works generally in applications. This could well be AMD's pathway to similar refreshes between future gens.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Rocket Lake was also in the same boat timeline-wise, but OEM's needed new stuff, so they had to release a [relatively] full i5/i7/i9 lineup as a stopgap. But otherwise, same deal.

I feel pretty bad for anyone who picked up rocket lake after seeing how much better Alderlake is.... I think this is quite different though it's a singular sku and gives people with a 3800X or slower Cpu a really nice drop in upgrade without having to ditch their platform (B450/X470/B550/X570) assuming the price doesn't suck.... Nobody with a 10700k or 10600K should have been excited about Rocketlake and anyone with somthing older was SOL.

 

[londiste]

For people like me who were waiting for an update to the 5600X at the $300-$350 price point, this is a disappointment.

3D Vcache at least for today is an advance packaging solution and comes with an attached cost. It makes sense to do this for EPYC, perhaps (some) Threadrippers and a desktop halo SKU but not for normal, cheap SKUs. Also note that 5800X3D is compared on slides to 12900K and 5900X - both $500+ CPUs - and AMD is quite directly saying this aimed is for gaming (probably will lose out in most if not all productivity tests to both).

My concern is more over what the -200MHz means. Is the L3 that power-hungry that it digs into the CCD power?

This. L3 consumes power and 200MHz sounds like a minor compromise for that much more cache.

 

[AusWolf]

To be honest, I didn't expect anything revolutionary right before the release of Zen 4, so I've got nothing to be disappointed about.

 

[Wirko]

Having a CPU like the one Lisa Su showed off would be nice. The cores on the chiplet with 3D cache would act as "Performance" cores, and those on the chiplet without it would be "Efficient" cores.

 

[Tigger]

AMD is trying to present the 5800X3D only as a technology demonstrator only

I agree, only to regain the Gaming crown till AM4 comes out. If not, why only use it on the 5800x?

 

[AusWolf]

I agree, only to regain the Gaming crown till AM4 comes out. If not, why only use it on the 5800x?

My guess is that it would be too expensive to use on 2 dies, and either not beneficial, or not economical to use it on dies with fewer cores. Just guessing, though.

Edit: Also, more SKUs mean more stock on store shelves, which is something they probably don't want to be stuck with before the release of AM5.

 

[Tomgang]

I will say im disappointed. I had hoped for a 5950X3D cpu. But dosent seems happening so far.

 

[Vayra86]

These two statements contradicts themselves.

If AMD is prioritizing AM5/Zen 4 over AM4 (which from a corporate standpoint, they probably are doing so), then it totally makes sense to shift resources, production and consumer focus on a newer platform (where consumers will have to spend more) instead of letting people spend less upgrading one single thing. Plus, if their slides are anything to go by, AMD probably doesn't feel the need to put so much pressure over Intel in such little time because the single Ryzen 7 5800X3D is probably enough to take back the gaming performance crown .

Intel did its own Alder Lake marketing best by saying it will happily pull 241W to pass by AMD on a few benchmark charts. Its effectively what AMD pulled with Vega - clocked so far out of comfort, you get to question its purpose, especially when even then the net gain over competition is negligible. And underneath, with enough undervolting, you find a pretty decent product after all.

PL1=PL2 basically was enough for AMD to take a chill pill. Intel has nothing on them just yet, ADL is worthless in enterprise, and its fancy new stuff with issues in MSDT. Timing wise, there are many things consumers would wait on, such as DDR5, Win11 maturing further (or even having a purpose), and even the return of sanity in chip markets.

It makes all sorts of sense to postpone stuff to make a better product tomorrow. Drip feeding improvements yearly never really did anyone any good. You don't upgrade yearly.

 

[Bomby569]

These two statements contradicts themselves.

If AMD is prioritizing AM5/Zen 4 over AM4 (which from a corporate standpoint, they probably are doing so), then it totally makes sense to shift resources, production and consumer focus on a newer platform (where consumers will have to spend more) instead of letting people spend less upgrading one single thing. Plus, if their slides are anything to go by, AMD probably doesn't feel the need to put so much pressure over Intel in such little time because the single Ryzen 7 5800X3D is probably enough to take back the gaming performance crown .

i don't think there's much money on selling chipsets, what is this "consumers will have to spend more" in AMD money you are talking about? AMD doesn't make motherboards.

 

[chrcoluk]

I dont think AMD will make their mid range zen 3 more affordable, they seem to be following the trend of typical tech companies now which is to maximise margins even if its at the cost of overall profits and sales. Their chips also still hold a good place in the market as less compatibility issues to worry about as well as better power efficiency.

 

[Vayra86]

I dont think AMD will make their mid range zen 3 more affordable, they seem to be following the trend of typical tech companies now which is to maximise margins even if its at the cost of overall profits and sales. Their chips also still hold a good place in the market as less compatibility issues to worry about as well as better power efficiency.

Net result is as it always was: you get what you pay for.

Competition doesn't mean race to the bottom, it means competition, movement in the market, and it means little to no stagnation. Somehow people seem to think competition always results in a lower price. In reality it never does, it just means the bill gets paid somewhere else. Usually still from your wallet somehow, or someone else's. Look at those fast delivery services. They raced to the bottom, and now society's paying the price of those temporary shit contracts when those flash delivery services started toppling. (They already are...)

 

[Bomby569]

I might be wrong but Intel will get back a lot of people, they have better (better then their previous ones, i'm not comparing to amd) cpu's and at good prices, they been doing it since the 10400

 

[jesdals]

Well this cpu might be a great end deal for 2xxx and 3xxx series user that let them get some more power to wait for second generation AM5 - every socket and adoption of new memory like the DDR5 is going to have a lot of teething troubles

 

[chrcoluk]

Net result is as it always was: you get what you pay for.

Competition doesn't mean race to the bottom, it means competition, movement in the market, and it means little to no stagnation. Somehow people seem to think competition always results in a lower price. In reality it never does, it just means the bill gets paid somewhere else. Usually still from your wallet somehow, or someone else's. Look at those fast delivery services. They raced to the bottom, and now society's paying the price of those temporary shit contracts when those flash delivery services started toppling. (They already are...)

It can mean both, a company can produce newer products whilst selling the old at a reduced price, but I think they have worked out this is less profitable hence the change in direction.

 

[EzioAs]

i don't think there's much money on selling chipsets, what is this "consumers will have to spend more" in AMD money you are talking about? AMD doesn't make motherboards.

If people could upgrade the CPU this year on the same platform, odds are definitely lower that they'll upgrade later this year into Zen 4. Again, AMD would really like their next gen stuff, which could be priced higher along with the chipset sales (those add up even if they are smaller), to gain attraction instead of selling older platform (which also lacks a lot features compared to Intel's current offering).

 

[Vayra86]

It can mean both, a company can produce newer products whilst selling the old at a reduced price, but I think they have worked out this is less profitable hence the change in direction.

That is the net result of movement in the market. The fact you can buy Ryzen CPUs at a reduced price from old gens is not new and has not changed. Its not changing now. AMD is just not releasing a whole new stack of samey stuff.

 

[chrcoluk]

That is the net result of movement in the market. The fact you can buy Ryzen CPUs at a reduced price from old gens is not new and has not changed. Its not changing now. AMD is just not releasing a whole new stack of samey stuff.

You cant buy old gen AMD cheap here, its history.

3600X still costs more than what I paid for my 2600X, when I got my 2600X as a latest gen chip.

 

[Vayra86]

You cant buy old gen AMD cheap here, its history.

You can't buy anything cheap right now, the cause isn't AMD. Zoom out a bit. Prior to october last year Ryzen CPUs of old gen were priced just fine.

 

[chrcoluk]

You can't buy anything cheap right now, the cause isn't AMD. Zoom out a bit. Prior to october last year Ryzen CPUs of old gen were priced just fine.

Not last October either, I been looking for over a year. I dont think I recall saying this is just AMD either.