Ryzen is extremely cheap to make due to it's relatively small size (189mm²) and the use of an inexpensive manufacturing process.
Lower margins per sold CPU can result in higher total profit as well
Dang, price cuts two months after release are not an indicator that things are well for Ryzen.
Only in the alternate reality you live in.Dang, price cuts two months after release are not an indicator that things are well for Ryzen.
Only in the alternate reality you live in.
Dang, price cuts two months after release are not an indicator that things are well for Ryzen.
Intel just completely re-positioned their entire core count price tiering, given the 6 core zen's haven't moved at all in price, its a pretty good reflection on the fact intel has felt the need to respond to AMD by big reduction in 8 core CPU's prices, so amd adjusts accordingly......
Not an indicator that things are well for skylake-x..........
really? You can craft it in whatever light you want to.Again this this? History says otherwise.
They would then raise the price of cpus so that the demand would match the supply of mobos.Either that, or CPU supply is outstripping motherboard supply, so they're correcting to keep the R7 chips moving off the shelves (instead of selling cheaper R5 chips). Given the OEM situation with AM4 I would not be surprised by that.
really? You can craft it in whatever light you want to.
The SOC size has grown, the process has stayed the same, price per core has dropped. When in Intels HEDT History has this happened? Or do we just frame history from your perspective?
That isn't my logic at all, for one thing, BD wasn't actually competitive in any shape or form.HEDT has been getting steady 2C increases at the $1000 price tier that dropped everything else below.
Quick example, Nehalem-EP 4/8 at $1000, SB-E 6/12 at $1000, HSW-E 8/16 at $1000, SKL-X 10/20 at $1000... Im sure BD forced Intel to launch 8C at $1000 instead of a 6C based on your logic.
bloomfield 4 core 45nm 263mm 4/4/4 284/562/999
gulftown 6 core 32nm 248mm 6 999
sandy-E 6 core 32nm 435mm 4/6/6 285/555/990
haswell-E 8 core 22nm 358mm 6/6/8 389/583/999
broadwell-E 10 core 14nm 246mm 6/6/8/10 434/617/1089/1723
skylake-X 12 core 14nm ??? 6/8/10/12 389/599/999/1199Different sources are saying the yield is over %80. Meaning quite a few perfectly good 8 core are having to be fused down to 6 core to make R5. By dropping the R7 price some, that will push more R7's out the door and raise their overall ASP. (Average Selling Price)Either that, or CPU supply is outstripping motherboard supply, so they're correcting to keep the R7 chips moving off the shelves (instead of selling cheaper R5 chips). Given the OEM situation with AM4 I would not be surprised by that.
That isn't my logic at all, for one thing, BD wasn't actually competitive in any shape or form.
making this stuff line up is a nightmare......Code:bloomfield 4 core 45nm 263mm 4/4/4 284/562/999 gulftown 6 core 32nm 248mm 6 999 sandy-E 6 core 32nm 435mm 4/6/6 285/555/990 haswell-E 8 core 22nm 358mm 6/6/8 389/583/999 broadwell-E 10 core 14nm 246mm 6/6/8/10 434/617/1089/1723 skylake-X 12 core 14nm ??? 6/8/10/12 389/599/999/1199
Now you can argue this many ways, but one thing its worth point out is that the two lowest models generally had the same core count. which now shifts the 8 to the second lowest instead of the 3rd lowest. So the pricing brackets have stayed the same ( except that insane 1700) but the SKU design has changed.
If Zen didn't exist would the 8 core be the second lowest SKU? would it be 6/6/8/10/12 at something like 389/580/900/1200/1700. Given the lowest 6 core has stayed the same price for 3 generations what does that tell you?
Different sources are saying the yield is over %80. Meaning quite a few perfectly good 8 core are having to be fused down to 6 core to make R5. By dropping the R7 price some, that will push more R7's out the door and raise their overall ASP. (Average Selling Price)
Why do you make <redacted> like "I hope AMD kept one in the chamber" after the Skylake-X announcement?I have to ask, why do you make 70-80 posts a day defending everything AMD? Don't you have work or school or something else better to do?
Rather than just trolling, how about you offer up your thoughts of why devaluing your flagship product two months after release is a sign of good.
They would then raise the price of cpus so that the demand would match the supply of mobos.
What you said was completely false....
Different sources are saying the yield is over %80. Meaning quite a few perfectly good 8 core are having to be fused down to 6 core to make R5. By dropping the R7 price some, that will push more R7's out the door and raise their overall ASP. (Average Selling Price)
That's probably why we haven't seen the R3's being released yet as well. Not enough salvage parts around to make R5's, let alone even lower priced R3's.Say what now? They need more market share, not less. One of the issues AMD faced in the Ryzen launch is that prospective buyers have not been able to (and in some cases still can't) get exactly the motherboard they want. So they sit on their hands and wait for the board they want, unless given financial incentive to move on a discounted CPU. And they want to sell at the higher R7 ASP.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. They can only move as many CPUs as there are boards out there, so it's better to sell R7s than R5s. So they lower R7 prices a bit while keeping R5 prices the same.
Makes sense to me anyway.
Said by who, anyway?Threadripper 16 core said to cost $850. Holy crapola.
Said by who, anyway?