[News] AMD Confirms "Full Spectrum" of Unlocked, Overclockable Ryzen CPUs

[StyM]

https://www.techpowerup.com/229394/a...ble-ryzen-cpus

AMD has seemingly confirmed that there will be more than just the fabled 8-core, 16-thread Ryzen CPUs we've only as of yet seen presented by the company. Come the expected Ryzen launch before the end of Q1 (which means, before the end of March), we should see more Ryzen CPUs than only 8-core solutions, though AMD still hasn't revealed exactly the core-count/configurations of the other CPUs on their product stack. Theoretically, AMD could follow the Intel path of simply disabling SMT (Simultaneous Multi-Threading, AMD's equivalent to Intel's Hyper Threading) and thus crafting another product, though this is pure speculation on my part. Whether or not AMD will include 4-core or 6-core CPUs on their product stack as well is as of now an unconfirmed, educated guess.

Additionally, in an interview with PCWorld, AMD's Jim Anderson, senior vice president and general manager of AMD's Computing and Graphics business, said the company are "(...) not going to do a paper launch (...) We've done that before. We're not going to mess with it". AMD's Rob Hallock further shed some light on the "Q1" timeline of Ryzen's launch: "When companies say first quarter or first half, people assume that means the very end of that time frame," Hallock said. "The very last day of Q1 is not our trajectory."

Oh, and as a coup-de-grace (pardon my french, artistic liberty here), AMD has seemingly confirmed that all Ryzen CPUs will be unlocked and overclockable - though while overclocking is supported with every Ryzen processor, only the more enthusiast-focused AM4 boards with X300, X370, and B350 chipsets will actually be able to crank those chips to... your particular choice of multiplier.

[vario]

https://www.techpowerup.com/229394/a...ble-ryzen-cpus

Well , i was hoping for that .Smart decision, all more budget oriented enthusiasts will flock to AMD if the claims of IPC and clockspeed are gonna pan out .
All seems to be ok , dont f it up AMD.

[zalbard]

Great move. Should be especially appealing to those with pretty limited budget.

[kromosto]

threads/cores 8/16 ???? so AMD invented reverse hyperthreading and run 1 thread on 2 core????

[vario]

threads/cores 8/16 ???? so AMD invented reverse hyperthreading and run 1 thread on 2 core????

Nice catch, the elusive amd slide maker strikes yet again ...

[AliG]

threads/cores 8/16 ???? so AMD invented reverse hyperthreading and run 1 thread on 2 core????

[Aleki]

threads/cores 8/16 ???? so AMD invented reverse hyperthreading and run 1 thread on 2 core????

Egads! That would actually be pretty freaking cool. Imagine x2 3.5GHz processors natively interleaving tasks to form 1 thread; that would give quite the boost to otherwise poorly optimized programs

[drmrlordx]

Oh no, not reverse ht/speculative threading again. We've been hearing rumours about that since, what, 2006?

[kromosto]

Oh no, not reverse ht/speculative threading again. We've been hearing rumours about that since, what, 2006?

hypo-threading ???

[Metroid]

It's too good to be true, this was overclockers strategy with i7 920 and it worked, intel killed that with the k series, bad move. I hope AMD can deliver the promise.

[AliG]

It's too good to be true, this was overclockers strategy with i7 920 and it worked, intel killed that with the k series, bad move. I hope AMD can deliver the promise.

I'm not sure Intel necessarily killed overclocking with the 'k' series, but rather the change in bus strategy greatly limited frequency based overclocking. FSB was very flexible by Conroe; ring bus seemed to really dislike going above 100 MHz (possibly because it tied all the other controllers too).

In either case you still get terrific value out of a low end 'k' processor.

[vario]

I'm not sure Intel necessarily killed overclocking with the 'k' series, but rather the change in bus strategy greatly limited frequency based overclocking. FSB was very flexible by Conroe; ring bus seemed to really dislike going above 100 MHz (possibly because it tied all the other controllers too).

In either case you still get terrific value out of a low end 'k' processor.

There is no such thing as a low end K processor.Even the dual core ones are pricy.
People were getting Terrific value out of a celeron 300A, or Duron 600 , or pentium MMX 166 , or for example I7 920 , or maybe 960T with unlocking two cores and overclocking beyond 1100T.
Paying for a 7700K almost double the price of a playstation 4 in some countries for mid range CPU alone is hardly "terrific value".
And yes Intel actively seeks killing off any overclocking beyond the parts they want.Just like with skylake.And both chipsets and cpus.

[AliG]

There is no such thing as a low end K processor.Even the dual core ones are pricy.
People were getting Terrific value out of a celeron 300A, or Duron 600 , or pentium MMX 166 , or for example I7 920 , or maybe 960T with unlocking two cores and overclocking beyond 1100T.
Paying for a 7700K almost double the price of a playstation 4 in some countries for mid range CPU alone is hardly "terrific value".
And yes Intel actively seeks killing off any overclocking beyond the parts they want.Just like with skylake.And both chipsets and cpus.

I dunno, I'd consider a 7600k to be pretty affordable.

Overclocking has always been pay to play. Sorry.

[vario]

I dunno, I'd consider a 7600k to be pretty affordable.

Overclocking has always been pay to play. Sorry.

no it was not. It cost me absolutely nothing to overclock my pentium 166mmx to 225mhz , and it was the case for a long time that you could oc stuff without big money splash.Even my first ever OC of AMIGA`s mc68040 turbo card from 40 to 50mhz required only a very small expenditure of exchanging the quartz.
And later on for a bit more headroom (and silence really) a good air cooling.
To OC you never needed the "OC" ram/mainboard/cpu and flashy lights.
The "value" overclocking was about getting same or near performance as standard high powered chip, to get same performance for less.And that was terrific value.
7600K is not cheap either and hardly a value, what is more important you cant put it in cheap board and oc, because you need the Z chipset ...
Anyhow, seems like AMD went with the "get enthusiasts back" approach, and i commend them for it. 8 Cores, overclocking on every chip, and even on most chipsets, and not only all that, you can get APU or CPU on the same board. If this will pan out, every pc i will build will probably be on AMD again.

[Particle]

There is no such thing as a low end K processor.Even the dual core ones are pricy.
People were getting Terrific value out of a celeron 300A, or Duron 600 , or pentium MMX 166 , or for example I7 920 , or maybe 960T with unlocking two cores and overclocking beyond 1100T.
Paying for a 7700K almost double the price of a playstation 4 in some countries for mid range CPU alone is hardly "terrific value".
And yes Intel actively seeks killing off any overclocking beyond the parts they want.Just like with skylake.And both chipsets and cpus.

Former Pentium 200 (non-MMX) user here. Loved it.

[Metroid]

Intel messed up, overclocking these days is not like it used to, the cpu k series was bad enough and the need for the z mb series was double bad enough. I like the days you could overclock a $150 product and match or beat a $999 product, that was the golden age, if you are from back then, then you know how crowded xs used to be.

Anyhow, seems like AMD went with the "get enthusiasts back" approach, and i commend them for it. 8 Cores, overclocking on every chip, and even on most chipsets, and not only all that, you can get APU or CPU on the same board. If this will pan out, every pc i will build will probably be on AMD again.

That is exactly what I think, and now AMD has a product for that, a product that might well be a game changer.

[Sparky]

Overclocking before it was mainstream marketed was the best.

Pentium 133 I pumped to 166, a 200 MMX to 233, fiddled with an old Duron but the board was VERY unhappy with me with unlocked PCI bus mulitpliers A64 3700+ San Diego I pushed all the way to 2.86GHz I think it was (FX-57 speeds), Opteron 165 to 2.8GHz... yup. Fun times.

[Lightman]

Pencil mods bring sweet memories! I started overclocking from Amiga 1200 68030 Turbo

[zanzabar]

I'm not sure Intel necessarily killed overclocking with the 'k' series, but rather the change in bus strategy greatly limited frequency based overclocking. FSB was very flexible by Conroe; ring bus seemed to really dislike going above 100 MHz (possibly because it tied all the other controllers too).

In either case you still get terrific value out of a low end 'k' processor.

remember when the z170 (and even the b150) let you overclock the base clock on non k editions, then intel killed it with a micro code update for the uefi even though there was no technical reason they should not be able ot do it since that involved lowering the cache and buss multi.

[Metroid]

remember when the z170 (and even the b150) let you overclock the base clock on non k editions, then intel killed it with a micro code update for the uefi even though there was no technical reason they should not be able ot do it since that involved lowering the cache and buss multi.

I forgot that, that was bad too. It cant be helped, that is what happens when there is no competition. I hope things will change in the coming quarter.

[AliG]

Pencil mods bring sweet memories! I started overclocking from Amiga 1200 68030 Turbo

My favorite was the old unlocking of extra GPU pipelines. You could literally transform a midrange Radeon to the high end varient with just a few pencil strokes

[Particle]

I have fond (not really) memories of using a conductive trace pen to bridge laser-cut multiplier selection bridges on an Athlon XP-M so that I could have a higher multiplier. Due to how tiny those traces were, it was necessary to cut tiny, thin strips of tape to stick between each trace, paint everything to fill in whatever wasn't masked, and then remove the tape so that the areas between conductive traces wouldn't also be bridged. It didn't always work on the first try.

[Sparky]

Oh yes, the exposed die days. Had an A-XP that the edges looked like somebody had chewed on it, but it always worked!

[FischOderAal]

You guys still overclock? The last CPU I overclocked was my C2D E7200. After that I kinda lost interest because every game would run good regardless and undervolting is also not that interesting any more.

Back to topic Now that my A4-SFX is inbound to house my current system (i5 4570, 16 GB RAM, R9 380) I am looking for something to put into my NCASE M1 I'm quite certain this will be my first AMD build since the A-XP IQYHA era. Well, it will depend on whether there will finally be good ITX mainboards for AMD. Most manufacturers seem to not care about AMD too much unfortunately.

[vario]

I have fond (not really) memories of using a conductive trace pen to bridge laser-cut multiplier selection bridges on an Athlon XP-M so that I could have a higher multiplier. Due to how tiny those traces were, it was necessary to cut tiny, thin strips of tape to stick between each trace, paint everything to fill in whatever wasn't masked, and then remove the tape so that the areas between conductive traces wouldn't also be bridged. It didn't always work on the first try.

I was pencil modding Duron 600 to get multis working, and boy , did this thing go, i topped at 1050Mhz using some basic cooler, and if i remember correctly the fastest amd chip at the time was thunderbird 1ghz.So in some tests it came to be even faster than the top dog .Pencil modding durons of these era was easier because of the ceramic substrate, just paint it with a pencil and voila.
600 to 1050 using a pencil. Thats value :P