Maybe it’s a mistake or maybe AMD see an unserved market. AMD could just be capitalising on underground marketing.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD confirms Ryzen 7 5800X3D launches this spring, Zen4 Raphael in 2H 2022
- Thread starter Dave2150
- Start date
Maybe it’s a mistake or maybe AMD see an unserved market. AMD could just be capitalising on underground marketing.
It seems AMD are planning on giving us a similar lifespan for AM5 as AM4 (Another reason I wont be switching back to Intel)
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-aims-for-am5-to-have-a-similar-lifespan-to-am4-(5-years).html
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-aims-for-am5-to-have-a-similar-lifespan-to-am4-(5-years).html
Great news. Looks like I’ll be with AMD through the entire DDR5 age.
Yep looking good. As one of the comments mentioned, I will probably skip the first chipset as they mature (similar to X370 which didn't have a lot of support for the Ryzen 5000). I will drop either a 5900X or 5900X3D into my X570 board and wait a few years. I know everyone wants the latest and greatest but my 3700X is still an awesome processor and I really doubt I will have a need for DDR 5 for at least 4 or 5 years. Currently rocking that with an RX6800, series X and PS5, and these will be the deciding factor when it comes to games. Hell even my sons Ryzen 2600 and 6600Xt is pushing well over 120fps on warzone on the new monitor I bought him for Christmas.
Soldato
Doesn't mean much if you can't put a newer chip into earlier boards.
Makes sense. I’ll probably buy AM5 at launch. Likely I’ll go with ASRock X670 and highend chip and 128gb of DDR5. Then probably skip a CPU generation.
They will plan ahead this time and have larger bios size
100% This, It was an oversight last time, cant see them making that mistake again.
Soldato
You missed the memo then? 5xxx parts now go in a320's and there's work going on in the background for the B350/X370's that you couldn't use previously, apart from a few like my ASRock boards.
The are basically dumping support for the low end Althon parts in the newer BIOS revisions and tweaking the UI design to make it more BIOS and less UEFI super mega flashy.
You guys talk about AM5 right? I have no doubt that AMD learned from AM4, AM5 first generation boards should have enough bios size to support future cpu-s without problem. AM4 was first generation and ofcourse it had some problems, but it should be much easier for AMD now.
This is how I am thinking as well but I know a lot of people got burned on the first gen of AM4 so that eroded trust with them.
Soldato
AMD also got burned though really, manufacturers weren't willing to make the effort for an unproven platform that may have flopped on its face like previous AMD parts did. It's a shame really as you say it hurt the platform in the long term, maybe some of the manufacturers thought they'd do an Intel if they were successful and dump it after 18-24 months. *shrug*
I don’t think it did. Motherboard makers pushed out updates for boards that fell under minimum requirements.
Soldato
Perhaps AMD should ask you in future what to price things at?
In 2017 if they did a like for like with Intel the 1800X/1700X would have launched at £899 to match the 6900K, and the R5 1600X would have been £429 to match the 6850K, with the R5 1500X at £369 to match the 6700K/7700K, and the R3 1300 at £259 to match the i5 6600K/7600K. So yes they would have had worse performance in the 4c/4t and 4c/8t but would have beaten the 6850/6900K but more importantly the prices prices would have been fine, since that is what Intel were charging and people were buying them, right?
I mean would you have preferred that, and then reduce the prices over the years?
Yeah, some early AM4 boards really were poor.
You're comparing desktop to HEDT, a fairer comparison would be the 1800X / 1700X to the 8700k in terms of pricing but the point I'm making is the higher CPU prices AMD now charges offsets the saving from keeping the board so whether you go Intel and change the board and CPU after 4 year or go AMD and just change the CPU your really no better off at the end of the day.
Soldato
What, so now you are saying that AMD's desktop part that spanked the so called HEDT (which is considered subpar now) can't be compared because they out did them too much? Intel chose not to release desktop parts with more than 4c/8t for 10+ years. The 8700K didn't exist when AM4 was launched btw.
So you've not answered the question at all really, would you have preferred they priced the parts higher so on a c/t basis they were the same as Intel but with a cheaper board (none X99) would that make you happier and then reducing the pricing over the next 4-5 years? Or did you prefer that AMD dropped the mic on the first round and left Intel to respond and forcing them to introduce more cores and threads on desktop parts.
The 8700k launched the same year as the 1700X/1800X so that's a perfectly valid comparison and anyone who bought that CPU would have enjoyed 3 years of superior gaming performance and similar MT before it was finally surpassed by the 5000 series, then when ADL released they would have then been able to sell the CPU and board for atleast £100 more than what you'd get for just an 1700X/1800X and buy a 12600k + Z690 for £100 more than just a 5800X so in terms of cost there is really no difference yet with Intel you'd have a brand new Z690 vs an old X370 if you were lucky "asrock" and got the bios update.