SFF.Network AMD Ryzen announced, detailed and available for pre-order TODAY !

Ever since AMD first announced the work that would later be branded as Ryzen, the company has been strategically and masterfully orchestrating a narrative of dramatic change and disruption to the staid status quo of consumer and enthusiast-grade processors. Today, however, AMD has built up this performance into a crescendo, by revealing their top-performing Ryzen AM4 CPUs today.

Read more here.

 

[Josh | NFC]

ATX can be made small form factor. Heck, most of the "mini" ITX small form factor cases on the market are large enough in terms of liters to support ATX.

Auriel is downright tiny, and it isn't like I tried to jam in parts in the most efficient way. If you placed the PSU over the motherboard and eliminated the stand you could have a very sff ATX rig.

But something to think about. To me, usable desk space (footprint) is key. You could "cubize" Auriel, and it would take up less cubic volume, but you would lose MUCH more desk space.

I'm a bit of a footprint nut. These two cases might not be considered SFF by several users on this forum, but I consider them very small form factor for the hardware they support. You can put them on a desk and they are probably have a MUCH smaller footprint than whatever mini itx chassis they are running now. I also design them to minimize CABLE footprint too:

 

[K888D]

ATX can be made small form factor. Heck, most of the "mini" ITX small form factor cases on the market are large enough in terms of liters to support ATX.

Auriel is downright tiny, and it isn't like I tried to jam in parts in the most efficient way. If you placed the PSU over the motherboard and eliminated the stand you could have a very sff ATX rig.

But something to think about. To me, usable desk space (footprint) is key. You could "cubize" Auriel, and it would take up less cubic volume, but you would lose MUCH more desk space.

I'm a bit of a footprint nut. These two cases might not be considered SFF by several users on this forum, but I consider them very small form factor for the hardware they support. You can put them on a desk and they are probably have a MUCH smaller footprint than whatever mini itx chassis they are running now. I also design them to minimize CABLE footprint too:

Your work is very impressive Josh!

 

[MarcParis]

@Josh | NFC, you are a true artist...all your creation are like statues..

 

[MarcParis]

Bing, news about ryzen temperature sensor
https://www.techpowerup.com/231473/amd-says-ryzen-1700x-1800x-have-a-temperature-reporting-offset
Clearly AMD put an offset of +20°C between measured and real core temperature. Normally Bios update will solve that...strange choice indeed.

 

[MarcParis]

Temperature "bug" or misunderstanding is only on "X" version on Ryzen 7.

Not a big deal as R7 1700 is the true champion of Ryzen..

 

[alexep7]

Socketed Zen APUs...in 2018
Typical AMD.

 

[MarcParis]

Let's AMD stabilize this new promising Platform..

 

[alexep7]

Let's AMD stabilize this new promising Platform..

the thing is they said it would be this year. Just like Ryzen would be in 2016, just like Bristol Ridge would be released before Ryzen, just like others before that would be released on a certain date and then weren't. Always the same, they commit to dates and then delay the launch...it's very amateurish and they keep getting away with it.

AM4, that "new promising platform" has been around for customers in OEMs for 8 months now, if we're supposed to give them a year and a half for it to stabilize then there's something wrong.

 

[MarcParis]

C'est la vie..

 

[MarcParis]

and here is first B350 mini ITX board.. From Gigabyte
http://www.tomshardware.fr/articles/ab350n-gaming-wifi-carte-mere-mini-itx-gigabyte,1-63267.html

 

[MarcParis]

INCOMING!!!

The best is coming!

169$ for 4C/8T...
219$ for 6C/12T...
329$ for 8C/16T...

With B350 motherboard (from mini-itx to ATX), that's simply an earthquake in CPU world....sorry a "disrupt" like Dr. Lisa Sue liked to say..

link reddit : https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5zhuf1/amd_announces_ryzen_series_5_with_six_and/

 

[LocoMoto]

Mmm... R5 1600...

 

[GreatestUnKnown]

Why the 95w TDP for the R5 1600/x? Price points seem extremely targeted to upheave Intel but like most here I wait for motherboard mfgs to roll out with their board designs before I can start planning a build around AMD.

 

[TheHig]

Why the 95w TDP for the R5 1600/x? Price points seem extremely targeted to upheave Intel but like most here I wait for motherboard mfgs to roll out with their board designs before I can start planning a build around AMD.

Well it does stock 3.6 which is the boost for the vanilla 1600. With the 4.0 boost in 1600x I'm guessing it needs the juice to get there.

Overclocking the 1600 will blow the 65w tdp obviously as well.

Pricing is awesome if true but I agree the boards are not there yet... Especially for the sff crowd.

 

[GreatestUnKnown]

Well it does stock 3.6 which is the boost for the vanilla 1600. With the 4.0 boost in 1600x I'm guessing it needs the juice to get there.

Overclocking the 1600 will blow the 65w tdp obviously as well.

Pricing is awesome if true but I agree the boards are not there yet... Especially for the sff crowd.

My remark was not intended to mean that it should have a TDP of 95w when OC'd but to determine why it would have a larger power draw when the R7 1700 is at 65w TDP with more cores/threads.

 

[MarcParis]

Because all these r5 chips are faulty and recycled r7..

 

[BeerNsoup]

What he said would seem to make sense... That Ryzen needs the extra power to hit the higher frequencies. The R7 1700 is 3.0ghz/3.7ghz if I recall vs 3.6ghz/4.0ghz on the 1600. I wonder if the 1500x's disappointing clock speeds (compared to the previously rumoured 1400x) are due this as opposed to segmenting/marketing to make the next more expensive CPU more attractive.

If this is in fact true maybe it'll make boosting clock speeds up in small cases difficult?... Could also indicate clock speeds for Raven Ridge underwhelm a bit :/.

I don't see myself needing more than a 4c/8t, so I'm a little disappointed. I was most interested in the 1400x and the APU with HBM

 

[CC Ricers]

If 4c/8t can effectively double my rendering performance from a i3 4130T (only 2.9 Ghz) so be it, I'm getting a 1500x.

Gaming is probably gonna take a hit on the 6 core vs 8 core. 1 core disabled on each CCX, so each likely to access 6MB of cache at a time. The 4 core variants are gonna be interesting, who knows if one full CCX will be disabled to make it 4+0 or if it's a 2+2 config.

 

[BeerNsoup]

If 4c/8t can effectively double my rendering performance from a i3 4130T (only 2.9 Ghz) so be it, I'm getting a 1500x.

Gaming is probably gonna take a hit on the 6 core vs 8 core. 1 core disabled on each CCX, so each likely to access 6MB of cache at a time. The 4 core variants are gonna be interesting, who knows if one full CCX will be disabled to make it 4+0 or if it's a 2+2 config.

What I've been reading is speculation that it's 4+0 based on the L2 Cache size and also that 4+0 makes more sense from a manufacturing stand point with the APUs coming later in the year. If it was in fact 4+0 with an entire CCX disabled would that potentially help with the clock : power ratio vs say 2+2?

 

[TheHig]

My remark was not intended to mean that it should have a TDP of 95w when OC'd but to determine why it would have a larger power draw when the R7 1700 is at 65w TDP with more cores/threads.

Gotcha.