AMD has officially announced today that it will release its Ryzen CPUs on March 2nd. According to the red team, there will be three models available at launch; the Ryzen 7 1800X, Ryzen 7 1700X and Ryzen 7 1700. What’s also great is that AMD confirmed the rumoured prices for these processors. And yes, the high-end Ryzen model will be priced at under $500.
Here are the three models that will be available at launch:
- Ryzen 7 1800X: 8C/16T, 3.6 GHz base, 4.0 GHz turbo, 95W, $499
- Ryzen 7 1700X: 8C/16T, 3.4 GHz base, 3.8 GHz turbo, 95W, $399
- Ryzen 7 1700: 8C/16T, 3.0 GHz base, 3.7 GHz turbo, $329
AMD has also shared an image, claiming that the Ryzen architecture offers 53% better IPC (instructions per clock) than its Excavator architecture. AMD targeted a 40% gain, however it appears that the company exceeded its expectations with this brand new architecture.
AMD has also revealed the first official benchmarks for both the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X and the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X that can be viewed below.
The embargo for third-part benchmarks will be lifted on March 2nd, so stay tuned for more!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
R.I.P Amd,oh wait!!!
52%? That’s a lot % 😀
from the previous AMD underachievers.
True. they were low indeed.
This is from excavator, not bulldozer.
Still they were far from intel. I do not know the name of their architectures but the point is that the jump was easier to accomplish (not trying to deminish their efforts).
Just for reference:
1st gen-Bulldozer
2nd gen-Piledriver
3rd gen-Steamroller
4th gen-Excavator
thank you
It is especially for considering the size of AMD as a company.
GO REDS GO
Give it to me now!
My God!!!
Everybody is astonished by the performance leap. Plz. Remember that amd was so low in terms of cpu performance that having a 50% boost from previous architecture is only normal. Now this will give us more options as consumers. Intell will have to work on their stuff from now on since amd’s cought up with them.
That is good.
Seconding this. People are WAY too amazed by this than they should be.
The prices though.
Yea that’s what i’m happy about. I’m still going with intel but they better price drop their products otherwise ima turn red next time.
You are still going with intel? You re going to pay 400 euros and get 4c.4t 7700k instead of amd 1700x 8c16t for the same price? I have 2500k and iam getting amd x1700!
No, he meant that he already has an Intel processor and it would be a dumb move if he change his into AMD’s on the same performance just because it is cheaper.
That being said, if one day he want to upgrade and Intel is still going with their price tag, then he might turn into the dark force.
How is moving to cheaper components (with close or equal performance) is a dumb move? :v
Because upgrading right now, in my situation, is useless. Changing processor (cheaper) would also need me to change motherboard and i buy 500$+ mobos so it’s not so cheap anymore. I have means but i don’t like spending my money on useless stuff.
Oh got it, you’re just replacing the CPU.
I thought you where going for the full thing.
No sadly :X
Benchmarks leaked indicated that the 6 core/12 threads Ryzen 5 1600X is about 50% faster than the Core i5 7600K, just saying.
Nowhere near similar performance at same price tag.
Nick got it. What would be the point to change my 5930k right now. It’s not like it would be game changing or anything. Now with DX12, cpus will have lighter/more efficient use so it’s useless making the move right now. In the future, i’ll look up AMD if all stars align.
Im still going to wait and see on reviews and actual benchmarks, but i’m intrigued.
Because the 2500k is already quite old. I have a 5930k. No point to upgrade right now.
But i have 2500k so iam getting R1700X. it will be more powerfu even than 5930k.
Yes indeed! That’s a VERY good upgrade! I hope you’re satisfied with your new setup 😀
Of course it will be. But i will keep 970 for years since it still run evrything maxed at 30+ fps 1440p and i have 1440p monitor.
AMD’s green btw
RTG is red, but they certainly don’t develop any x86 CPUs
and the TDP. They undercut Intel by 45 watts which means the Ryzen architecture is much more efficient than anything Intel has ever made.
AMD reminds me of me. I too frequently set the bar low enough so when I do something average, everyone praise me for beating their expectations.
Yeah.
And that´s exactly the kind of comment that we expect from you…
Yes, they were low in IPC. But keep in mind this is the first iteration of a brand new architecture as well. Not even Intel expected them to even pull close to what they’re doing. Their Zen+ will be released on 7nm.
Cannon lake will essentially be Skylake + 2 cores. They will not be going down to 10nm.
Yea true. I expect them, over time, to become more efficient.
That’s dumb for a number of reasons. You do realize that Intel is several times larger than AMD right? You do know that Intel’s R&D budget is more money than AMD grossed in sales right?
Yea so ?. Intel has been idling for some time now since there was no competition whatsoever. Amd just prove them that even with lower budget they can be as good/better. Amd just proved that they can be efficient with less money than intel. That being said, their budget has always been lower than intel’s so why now ? why couldn’t they pull such a move 2-3 years earlier ? Meanwhile they lost market shares. But i have no doubt with the performances they’ve shown and the prices they tagged their products that they’ll gain a bunch of consumer’s hearts.
Your first comment don’t look completely precise.
Is it really right to say that 50% better performance over old FX processors is “normal”?
At first glance, people can think that almost ANY performance gain over FX is normal for today´s standards.. But we are talking about a contender against i7 6900k. So the question must be: how exactly a 6900k $1000+ is “normal” to you?
Well it was to be expected. See the intel 6900k as a ferrari and the amd’s previous cpu gen as a honda civic. Whatever intel was going to do, i would’ve never yielded the same performance gain compared to amd because they were already going to 300km/hr. Now amd was going @120km/hr with their last cpu gen. So it was expected in the actual technological world we live in that they were going to catch up some time and start going at 300km/hr too. The bump from where they were and to where they are now was possible thanks to RD and whatever else but such a bump will never happen on their next architecture. Unless something big happens and in that case, both intel and amd will benefit most likely.
The comparison is weird but i think it fits :).
And no a 6900k @1000k isn’t normal. Intel needs to get a reality check. Their performances aren’t to blame. Their prices are. Amd just made a good move. I hope for amd’s sake that their product is reliable so it’ll drop cpu prices aggressively from intel’s side.
Cheers.
From this angle it´s very agreeable.
If we talk only about performance, it´s good… even normal for a top tier processor, not exceedingly good. If we talk about performance/money, it really shines and justify all the OOHHH and AAAHH that everyone is telling.
I liked your reply. It´s a slap on AMD´s wrist for letting the gap in performance over the years AND a slap on Intel´s wrist for the abuse in the prices for processors.
Indeed the price is very aggressive and that’s very good.
Hopefully this gives AMD a decent boost in profits/revenue. The CPU market is far, far bigger than the GPU market, and they haven’t had a competitive product in the former for 4-5 years. If they can even get back to 10%-20% CPU market share, that’s a whole lot of cash for them to reinvest into better products on both sides.
That’s what i hope too, so they could also have a stronger marketing division ( the 480 didnt do so well, it could have been much better with more “marketing” ) .
John, the Ryzen 7 1700 is rated at 65W according to official sources, may be worth adding to the article.
Sell your i5s before they’re worth $120.
$12*
I am selling my 2500k with 12 gb ddr 3 1600 mhz and asusp5p67le motherboard for 200 euros. On March 2. Do you want it?
I just viewed the new Ryzen video on LinusTechTips and colour me impressed by AMD. It seems as though Intel finally have some serious competition so this should hopefully lead to great benefits for the consumer.
AMD’s equivalent to Intel’s X99-based CPUs seem the most impressive from a pricing point of view. With certain workloads these Ryzen chips actually beat Broadwell-E and do so for a vastly cheaper price. Great news.
Their competitor to i7 6700K/7700K seems to be a relatively less strong proposition given that they’ve not smashed Intel on price. The next chip up the scale, the 1700X, will naturally be better but at $399 it’s significantly more expensive than the aforementioned Intel chips.
Here’s looking forward to reading of how well Ryzen overclocks, what its thermals are like when overclocked and also seeing the benchmarks for a wide range of games.
can the “Ryzen 7 1700” be overclocked ? or will they lock it on purpose like intel do ?
If it can be overclocked its a huge deal (like all of these cpu’s) !
All 3 appear to be unlocked 🙂
Then that is perfect ^^ , i just got an arctic Liquid Freezer 360 on sales .
If i can reach 4.5Ghz or more with it i’ll be happy . No need to buy an intel i7 6900k for 1300$.
i never had amd cpu’s i had some amd gpu, but ryzen seems more enticing and i might send my trusty ivy bridge i7 to retirement earlier than expected
>And yes, the high-end Ryzen model will be priced at under $500.
And a RX 480 costs 199$, right? 😉
In reality even a RX 470 costs over 200$. I would be extremely surprised if Ryzen processors are actually sold at these low prices. If they launch at these prices I see them increasing in price over the course of the year.
Here in Romania, the RX 470 4 GB is around 200 euros… The GTX 1060 3 GB is around the same. And it only gets worse if you go for higher GPU’s. And don’t even get me started on the wages here, whoooo boy. :/
Anyone knows if I still can use my old GTX 750TI with this, I prefer to build the PC now with Ryzen then wait for Vega, until then I want to use my Nvidia card…
Of course you can. I am keepig my GTX 970 too since it runs evrything maxed 1440p with more than 30 fps so there is no need to change it until Nvidia releases volta in 2018
there is Embargoes on benchmarks???
yes, that’s an industry standard.
I’m sitting here with an i7 2600 (bought second hand for about 140 euros 3 years ago) and not upgrading. Not because I don’t want to, but because I only have enough money for a new GPU and not much else, going for an RX 480 most likely.
I think I can hold a bit of my old CPU for another year or so, before finally going with something newer :). Still I’m exited for AMD finally getting back in the CPU market.
whoa, the prices scalated fast my good old i7 960 price was 217,80€ in March of 2011
the same for graphic cards, the GTX 460 Direct CU price was 160€, now the same range cost between 250-310€
AMD thought multithreaded software would catch up earlier, which didn’t happen. They designed with that in mind, took that risk, and missed.
The hardware was there, but the software wasn’t ready to take advantage of it.
AMD is making movies now? I’ll go see this. Hope it’s in IMAX.
SOLD.
Debating on getting the 1700 or waiting for lower end ones.
Want to see the benchmarks vs intel.