3900X & 3950X Availability?

robfosters · 23 Sep 2019 at 10:23

4K8KW10 said:
Yes, 1 wafer from GLOBALFOUNDRIES' 12nm process for the cIOD.
1 wafer from TSMC 7nm for CPU
1 wafer from TSMC/Samsung/GLOBALFOUNDRIES for GPU.

Which equals not 1 BOM but 3 BOM, and dependence on the processes of different factories.

Also, Ryzen 9 3900X is a fail. It is extremely overpriced and consistently out of stock.
Ryzen 9 3950X is even worse - pushed back from September to November.

The chiplets for the consumer are not cheaper.

Show me on the doll where AMD touched you?

Minstadave · 23 Sep 2019 at 10:41

4K8KW10 said:
Yes, 1 wafer from GLOBALFOUNDRIES' 12nm process for the cIOD.
1 wafer from TSMC 7nm for CPU
1 wafer from TSMC/Samsung/GLOBALFOUNDRIES for GPU.

Which equals not 1 BOM but 3 BOM, and dependence on the processes of different factories.

Also, Ryzen 9 3900X is a fail. It is extremely overpriced and consistently out of stock.
Ryzen 9 3950X is even worse - pushed back from September to November.

The chiplets for the consumer are not cheaper.

If a chip is consistently out of stock surely its under priced?

killari · 23 Sep 2019 at 10:57

4K8KW10 said:
Yes, 1 wafer from GLOBALFOUNDRIES' 12nm process for the cIOD.
1 wafer from TSMC 7nm for CPU
1 wafer from TSMC/Samsung/GLOBALFOUNDRIES for GPU.

Which equals not 1 BOM but 3 BOM, and dependence on the processes of different factories

This argument is flawed. If you (for simplicity sake assume that all 3 dies are the same size and the yield is 100%) it’s 3 BOM for 3 times the number of processors.

Realistically this is not the case, and that’s where the beauty of using smaller chiplets really shines. The smaller the rectangular chiplets are the less wastage there is on a circular wafer. So from using chiplets you can end up with more processors than the equivalent monolithic design (assuming 100% yield) on the same number of wafers.

Where you have <100% yield you just lose the wafer space used by the defective chiplet rather than the entire monolithic die.

Yes there are additional overheads due to the contracting of additional parties, logistics, assembly etc, but the cost saving from decreased wastage should far outweigh that.

4K8KW10 · 23 Sep 2019 at 12:12

Minstadave said:
If a chip is consistently out of stock surely its under priced?

Someone said "people buy them faster than AMD can make them."
Yes but AMD is blind to see that there is much stronger market demand for a 12-core.
Instead they blindly and arrogantly offer "6-core for everyone".

Such companies don't end well, they must be warned.

TrM · 23 Sep 2019 at 12:29

4K8KW10 said:
Someone said "people buy them faster than AMD can make them."
Yes but AMD is blind to see that there is much stronger market demand for a 12-core.
Instead they blindly and arrogantly offer "6-core for everyone".

Such companies don't end well, they must be warned.

I really want what your smoking or drinking

there is a high demand for ryzen 5 cpu there 6 core 12 thread cpu I bet will be there best selling cpu when all desktop markets are taken into account same as i5 cpu for intel will proberly be the highest number sold across there range.

Amd and intel have both had supply issues on there cpu’s At launch intel 9th gen had terrible stock at launch i9 9900k hit the 600 pound mark at most stores at one time due to stock shortages. U honestly think intel and amd don’t know the volume they can make and a rougher estimation on how many they will sell?

what is the such fascination with 12 core cpu u say u want a 65w cheaper and then say the 3900X is a failure for stock and price ?

479.99 which I paid for my ryzen 9 was such a good price and I pulled the trigger on launch day cheaper then i9 nearly as much per core performance more cores was a no brainier! I’m sorry that you think the best cpu on the market right now is to much money but to a lot of people it worked out the perfect cpu for us at a price I thought was worth it!

I can wait to to see when intel bring out there 10 core cpu at least 500+ plus you slagging off of intel will make me laugh again instead of feeling sorry for u

Minstadave · 23 Sep 2019 at 12:40

4K8KW10 said:
Someone said "people buy them faster than AMD can make them."
Yes but AMD is blind to see that there is much stronger market demand for a 12-core.
Instead they blindly and arrogantly offer "6-core for everyone".

Such companies don't end well, they must be warned.

I think AMD are well aware there is strong demand for their CPU, that's why their prices have crept up.

Intel dont offer anything competitive and were selling their 8 core chip for £600 not long ago.

What is it you're expecting AMD to do? You want them not to offer 6 core chips? Why? They're going to be their biggest seller.

Woodsta888 · 23 Sep 2019 at 14:49

4K8KW10 said:
I think AMD effectively shot itself in both the feet by refusing to offer 12-core CPUs this generation.
We will have to wait for better times with Ryzen 4000.

Smffy · 23 Sep 2019 at 15:01

4K8KW10 said:
"people buy them faster than AMD can make them."

The key part of this is faster than they can make them. You’re assuming instead that they don’t want the money? Interesting point of view.

LePhuronn · 23 Sep 2019 at 15:39

Funny how Intel offered 4 cores for everyone for over a decade and not a word was said, but AMD offering 6 cores for everyone is apparently arrogant and they should be warned.

Bluntwrapped · 24 Sep 2019 at 08:01

I’m not a current owner but it’s great to see AMD doing so well. The lack of availability of some SKUs just makes things more desirable.

Seeing Intel struggle is so enjoyable, it should be made into ride at Disneyland

Woodsta888 · 25 Sep 2019 at 08:55

https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/a...aunch-due-to-unsatisfactory-clock-speeds.html

Print some new retail boxes with different core speeds on. Job done.

Grim5 · 25 Sep 2019 at 09:57

Woodsta888 said:
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/a...aunch-due-to-unsatisfactory-clock-speeds.html

Print some new retail boxes with different core speeds on. Job done.

Looks like AMD may have bitten off more than it can chew. To be expected - based on the other 3000 series parts - we knew for the 3950x to actually hit a single core of 4.7ghz it would have to be heavily binned.
So it's not a surprise that AMD is finding that the majority don't meet spec - so they have to delay it to build enough stock for a launch.

I'm going to go ahead and say getting a 3950x will be tough, stock may be thin even after launch.

Orange Nexus · 25 Sep 2019 at 10:41

Grim5 said:
Looks like AMD may have bitten off more than it can chew. To be expected - based on the other 3000 series parts - we knew for the 3950x to actually hit a single core of 4.7ghz it would have to be heavily binned.
So it's not a surprise that AMD is finding that the majority don't meet spec - so they have to delay it to build enough stock for a launch.

I'm going to go ahead and say getting a 3950x will be tough, stock may be thin even after launch.

It will be scarce like 3900 but the real reason for the delay is - they don't want it to take the limelight from TR3.

Minstadave · 25 Sep 2019 at 10:48

Margins are probably nice and high on the 3900X, which only needs one highly binned core. With no competition I can't imagine AMD are in a rush to start using two highly binned cores per CPU.

LePhuronn · 25 Sep 2019 at 11:14

If AMD have "bitten off more than they can chew" it'll be they didn't anticipate the volume of orders for EPYC, so all the best chiplets are going into servers, and because more chiplets are going into servers there's not enough of the high-clocking 6 and 8-core chiplets to fill the Ryzen SKUs. Clock speeds are a BIOS problem, not a silicon problem. A 16 core R9 is not going to take the shine off a 24 core Threadripper.

EPYC comes first, it is literally nothing more complex, sinister, convoluted or incompetent than that.

Woodsta888 · 25 Sep 2019 at 11:27

I think the 3950X will still be a multitasking monster, but it wont appeal to folk who require a fast single core speed for the likes of some games if it cant do 4.7Ghz as first claimed by AMD. If they can get it as fast as the 3900X and sell it as a 16 core part it will still be appealing to those who work and game on their machines. Just not what we were expecting as max boost. Maybe the parameters that control the boost just wont let it get to the advertised with the common cooling options. LN2 coolers for all!

marms · 25 Sep 2019 at 12:00

Minstadave said:
Margins are probably nice and high on the 3900X, which only needs one highly binned core. With no competition I can't imagine AMD are in a rush to start using two highly binned cores per CPU.

I've seen a couple of posts mentioning two highly binned cores but don't know why AMD would need to use two, is there any reason why this would be used?

Minstadave · 25 Sep 2019 at 12:24

marms said:
I've seen a couple of posts mentioning two highly binned cores but don't know why AMD would need to use two, is there any reason why this would be used?

I suppose you're right, they could use a second middle of the road core, but that would still potentially be a 3700X.

marms · 25 Sep 2019 at 13:02

Minstadave said:
I suppose you're right, they could use a second middle of the road core, but that would still potentially be a 3700X.

It's still better than using a chiplet that could create another 3950x, i feel that after going with the lower binned second chiplet on the 3900x they'll do the same on the 3950x.

I've heard a few stories of windows scheduler assigning lightly threaded tasks to the wrong chiplet on the 3900x and wonder if they are delaying the 3950x and threadripper until the problems are sorted out.

Minstadave · 25 Sep 2019 at 14:12

There was an article I saw this morning about Win 10 getting awareness of "preferred cores" that clock highest and using this for single threaded tasks.