Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
They have though. The 4 core Ryzen 3 originally competed aginst a 2 core i3. That's 50% extra for "free". The whole lineup has included these extra cores.
-
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 Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
They have though. The 4 core Ryzen 3 originally competed aginst a 2 core i3. That's 50% extra for "free". The whole lineup has included these extra cores.
This is the first time that AMD might have more performance regardless of how you measure it. That's not been the case with previous gens.
In fact an i3 could be a better choice for gaming than a Ryzen 3, regardless of how many extra cores it has.
I sincerely doubt that if AMD scores better in all metrics, that it will price its chips well below the comparable (scoring) Intel chip.
maybe amd planning ahead for the 10c intel 14nm++++++++++++++++++ chip.
i suspect (if no change to product stack)...
10c20t intel vs 16c32t amd
8c16t intel vs 12c24t amd
8c8t intel vs 8c16t amd
6c6t intel vs 6c12t amd
or maybe (highly doubt intel will change its product stack...but)...
10c20t intel vs 16c32t amd
8c16t intel vs 12c24t amd
6c12t intel vs 8c16t amd
4c8t intel vs 6c12t amd
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
Okay so based on Intel's current stack, the 6c6t Intel part you're refering to is the Core i5-9400? Yet the 6c12t AMD part is a budget Ryzen 3. That doesn't make sense.
Surely it's this:
Ryzen 3 (6c12t) vs i3
Ryzen 5 (8c16t) vs i5
Ryzen 7 (12c24t) vs i7
Ryzen 9 (16c32t) vs i9
Last edited:
above is comparing (rumoured) performance levels...
i guess a large part of it depends on what intel does with its price points...another man maths price-point theory from me would be, at equivalent-ish price points:
10c20t intel vs ??? (TR?)
8c16t intel vs 16c32t amd
8c8t intel vs 12c24t amd
6c6t intel vs 8c16t amd
4c4t intel vs 6c12t amd
if intel doesn't release anything in reply and/or doesn't drop prices, amd is going to run the roost with core/thread counts for a long while...
either amd increase the prices a bit, and just slots in just below the relevant performance points, or intel has to drop their prices to compete with amd...
who knows?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
I dont even know where maths comes into it. The clue is in the name. The Ryzen 5 will compete against i5. The Ryzen 7 will compete against i7 etc. There's nothing to speculate and theorise about. We already know how many cores each Intel chip has, it says on their website.
There is no technical reason why AMD can't do 10c/20t and 14c/28t Ryzen 3k's, 5/7c chiplets, the only downside is too many sku's and lowered differentiation.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
Yes their design allows so much flexibility. They can release a new sku to compete with anything new from Intel at the drop of a hat.
I think you're being a tad naive if you think Ryzen R3 must only compete with Intel i3, and so on and so on, even if AMD hit the ball out of the park in terms of performance (not cores or anything else - performance).
If AMD's R3 is beating an i5, they aren't going to sell it for half the cost of the i5. Their shareholders wouldn't be amused.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
Yeah but if they increased the price, there would be a gap in the market. If somebody wanted a budget computer, they would buy an i3 because AMD wouldn't have anything to compete with at that price.
If their Ryzen 3 was competing with an i5 like you say, surely they would change it's name to Ryzen 5. That's what the numbering is there for, to show how it compares.
How it compares to other AMD products, yes.
It's not there to show how it compares to Intel products. Although it might give that impression.
Otherwise why doesn't AMD use the same numbering for its GPUs as nVidia does?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
If the leaks about Navi are to be believed, the RX 3060 will compete against the 2060 etc. Personally I dont believe anything so far about Navi.
And their shareholders will be even less amused when AMD completely screw the pooch by having an industry-changing architecture and product stack which nobody buys because they're costed the same as Intel. AMD would be beyond retarded to charge Intel money for Ryzen 3000. There is no need to do so, and "budget brand" only came about because AMD had to price low because their kit was generally inferior to Intel's. Offering a superior product at sensible prices makes them the "better brand", not the "budget brand".
And let's be honest, there is no Intel comparison to be had; AMD have their 4 product tiers just like Intel. Ryzen 3 is the entry level, Ryzen 5 is the mid range, Ryzen 7 is the top end and Ryzen 9 is the super halo mega stuff, which all align with Intel's tiered stack. It is completely irrelevant that Intel's i3 stack are 4c/8t and AMD's Ryzen 3 stack will be 6c/12t, that is just how each company splits their offering.
Why? You don't think GTX 1080 performance with a single 8-pin power connector for $250 is exactly where the midrange should be in Q3 2019? 2 years on and a shrink to 7nm shouldn't give GTX 1060 performance with no auxiliary power supply for $130? There is not a single unreasonable or unrealistic thing about the Navi leaks.
Well I said they won't massively undercut Intel and you said they won't charge the same as Intel.
Fortunately there is quite the spectrum between those extremes.
I believe prices will be comparable to, not equal to, Intel's prices (for the mid-range at least; bets are off at the higher end where logic and pricing seldom meet).
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
Don't get me wrong, I'm buying a Navi card regardless, I just think 1080 performance for $250 is a little ambitious considering 1080 ti performance costs £649 when you look at the Radeon VII.
So why do you think AMD will massively undercut Intel on CPU prices, but not do the same for GPUs against nVidia?
not just MCE but also watt limits.
The chips are supposed to only be able to breach the TDP limit for short periods of time but that causes cpu's to throttle under extreme load so the board vendors knowing that reviewers will run extreme loads will adjust the behaviour.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
Nobody ever said AMD will massively undercut Intel on CPU prices. They will be similar in price to the current Ryzen 2000 processors just like the Ryzen 1000 processors before them. It's the performance that is massively improving. You're obsessing too much over core count when comparing with Intels prices.
I still think AMD will massivly undercut nVidia. Remember the RX 580 offering 6Gb 1060 performance for a far lower cost?
Last edited: