Comments Locked

69 Comments

Back to Article

  • jordanclock - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Anyone else find it a little funny that the second biggest logo on the Taichi is an Intel one and not a single AMD logo is to be seen?
  • Gothmoth - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    i wonder more why only 2 boards from asrock.

    with intel it seems they make a complete new board for every single feature they enable.....
  • Chaitanya - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Thats because this platform is scheduled to be released in August, while Intel Core-X is releasing coming few weeks. We will see more boards from all manufacturers closer to launch. Right now these boards were just shown off to press to let people should expect from new platform.
  • Vatharian - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Because Intel's platform is evolving one, and is generally known among engineers. They are familiar with Intel's design standards and with every generation, they just read updates. Now, this platform is something totally new, that came out of the blue. This means new design from scratch, high cost and many iterations, while ironing kinks and going back and forth with AMD. They even decided to use same PCB, which is very good decision in this case.

    Demand for platform is a big unknown - as soon as it starts flying off the shelves, next iterations of the boards, with different feature set will start to show, basically as soon as these new designs we see now will pay for themselves.
  • CajunArson - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Considering the crap-quality ethernet controllers that often get shoved onto these boards, I'd be loudly advertising Intel Gig-E hardware too as a sign that this board should be taken seriously.
  • Vatharian - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Why it would be otherwise? Has AMD actually made even single component that's actually on the board, as it is shipped?

    Also, fun fact: I have both AM3 motherboard that uses Intel's Pentium S478 cooler, and Intel's Socket 771 motherboard, that has mounting (and a cooler) from AMD, in this case from S939.
  • prisonerX - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Do you mean like the chipset? Pretty minor, I know.
  • Gasaraki88 - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    The chipset is actually made by ASMedia.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link

    chipset is from ASmedia, network controller from intel, realtek, or atheros, ece.

    AMD doesnt make any of it's chipset features, which is arguably their biggest weakness right now vs intel
  • ddriver - Tuesday, October 3, 2017 - link

    Everything important is integrated in the CPU. The "chipset" is very, very peripheral. Even most SATA comes directly from the CPU. So in a way amd makes most of the stuff that matters.
  • Krysto - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    "Funny" is not the right word. The right word is probably "antitrusty".

    Intel is likely using illegal shenanigans again to hurt AMD in every way it can. In this case, maybe get Asrock not to make so many motherboards, and put its logos on the ones it has.
  • HomeworldFound - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    This is why AMD isn't that popular, it's fans are all conspiracy theorists.
  • Hurr Durr - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    "Conspiracy theorist" is a pathetic canard introduced by media when it has absolutely nothing to say.

    What actually plagues those AMD fanatics is their victim culture. Muh ebil intel opresshun oy vey.
  • close - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    @HomeworldFound and @Hurr Durr It's not like Intel was officially found to have used illegal and anti-competitive practices for years in a successful attempt to keep AMD's market share as small as possible specifically by... "motivating" potential partners into avoiding AMD.

    The problem with internet commentators these days is that they have all sorts of personal opinions and the fact that they can share them with everyone suddenly turns them into facts. Jacks of all trades (masters of none).
  • Strunf - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    It's not cause Intel has been found guilty that now everything they do is close to illegal.

    Don't you think the FACT Intel has good network controllers (acknowledge by the industry) that makes it worth to advertise it?...
  • close - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    Do you see any mention of Intel logos in my comment? That's because I had nothing to say about that topic :). Come to think of it I also didn't suggest that everything they do is (close to) illegal. Just that they have a track record of breaking the law so thinking they *may* do it again is a legitimate concern, not a conspiracy theory.
  • HomeworldFound - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    I know that, but to suggest it still continues just because of an Intel label above the rear ports where other manufacturers label their NIC too is pretty silly. I can't see how that's "antitrusty" or "Intel is likely using illegal shenanigans again to hurt AMD in every way it can."

    The last thing Intel wants is to go through that again, and yes the comment is very conspiratorial.
  • Timoo - Wednesday, June 21, 2017 - link

    To be honest, I doubt that. The net gain they had by fucking AMD to the bone, was worth a lot more than the 2.5bln they paid in damages. White collar crimes: well-paid, low-level punishment.

    Doesn't mean they still do it, but purely from a business perspective it was very, very lucrative for Intel, even after convictions. So yes, the incentive did not disappear.
  • Xajel - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Naah, it's just a new platform from AMD.. they don't know if it will really kick it on or not, with Intel platform they know they will sell, but with this new one they just don't know, that's why even AM4 platform you don't have options like Intel's desktop platform..
  • CharonPDX - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    Not to mention the chipset naming that is remarkably similar to Intel's. Looking at that picture, I'd assume it was an Intel next-generation system, not an AMD.
  • Samus - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    It doesn't seem to be uncommon (although I'm surprised as you are) to see Intel NIC's on AMD boards recently. Nobody can take Atheros, Broadcom or Realtek seriously I guess, although HP has been using Broadcom NIC's in their servers for years now, and they are quite good.
  • close - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    High-end AMD boards have used Intel NICs before. Many ROG boards did. But since the controller is more expensive the mid- and low-end boards didn't get it.
  • ianochez - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 - link

    ahahah just seen it. really funny
  • nathanddrews - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    1x10GbE and 2x1GbE? That's real nice. So what's the 16C/32T R9 Threadripper going to cost? $699? $999? $1,299?
  • mkaibear - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Well, the Intel Xeon E5-2643 is I believe Intel's cheapest 16core/32thread CPU and that comes in at an RRP of $1846.00 - so I would suspect the Threadripper to come in at maybe $1500.
  • Flunk - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    I'd suspect a starting price closer to $1000, AMD really has to undercut Intel here to be considered in the top-end market because they lose in per thread performance
  • MrTeal - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    I'd probably agree. Given the 1800X launched at $499 and just got cut to $469, it's hard to imagine TR will be priced much north of $1k if it crosses that barrier at all.
  • firerod1 - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    I think $999 max is a safe bet, since its exactly double the 1800x in price/cores/threads. Then they can just cut the price a few months later lol.
  • beginner99 - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    I've heard as low as $849 for cheapest 16-core. Reason being that mainboards will cost a lot. More than x299 and $350 is probably for the lowest end models. So the 8-core TR will be priced exactly as the 1800x but you pay 2-3x as much for the mobo.
  • ddriver - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    There is no good reason for the motherboard to cost that much. It is basically your generic ryzen board, the only extra is the additional memory slots and I/O interconnect. Obviously, extra featured will add to the cost, such as 10gbit ethernet, but those are not mandatory, and without them, the price premium for threadripper mobos shouldn't be more than 50$ or so.
  • SaturnusDK - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    You have obviously got no idea how expensive it is to have exactly twice as many high speed interconnects routed on a motherboard the exact same size. As the number of interconnects increase the difficulty in routing and shielding these individually grows exponentially. Remember there still has to voltage regulators room for connectors with a specific spacing, 3x m.2 and 1x u.2 slot directly on the board etc etc. Pretty sure the board is at least 8-layer if not 12. That is excessively expensive to manufacture.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    The rumor mill says starting at $849 for the 16/32 variants.

    http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-threadripper-16-core...
  • Gothmoth - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    that would be fantastic but i doubt it .. there is not much room for 12 and 14 cores than.

    and if the perfoemance is right AMD has no reason to sell it THAT cheap.
  • close - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Well one chip apparently costs AMD ~$120 so it's still very profitable. This will also give you an idea of the premium Intel squeezed from customers over the years.
  • nevcairiel - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    These numbers rarely include R&D budget, so its hard to really put a price on a CPU that reflects the true cost, not only the production but also all the money that went into development.
  • Topweasel - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    R&D budget is going to be mostly across the whole Ryzen large since this, the Ryzen's, EPYC, are all using the same die. So this would be more about development of the packaging. This isn't HCC where you have a +20C die that only has low volume markets. That increases the amount that Intel has to increase cost to recoup funding.

    But still I think people look at Intel's pricing and see them as the best supply to demand scenario. It's not Intel has been cushioning costs due to lack of competition. How someone can look at 500% profit and talk about R&D costs is beyond me. If it takes 1000% profit to be profitable then neither company would be in this market.
  • systemBuilder - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    I think you forget that when the i486 was released it cost $25 to fabricate and sold for $400. That is more profitable than printing dollar bills. 1600% markup!
  • close - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    Then I call it a massive coincidence that Intel decided to sell you high end HCC CPUs at "dirt cheap" prices (for Intel and compared to the Xeon prices - since this is what they are) exactly when AMD managed to come up with something really competitive. Intel must be subsidizing the price out of their own pockets, right?

    This was exactly a competition issue. No competition in almost any CPU segment meant Intel could slowly increase prices since they would sell anyway in one segment or another. As soon as competition appeared prices dropped. It's literally a textbook example.
  • prisonerX - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Since demand is elastic with respect to price, you don't maximise your revenue just by charging more. Depending on the market you may make more money by reducing the price, since you'll sell more.

    Development costs are fixed and therefore irrelevant to pricing, that money is already spent. It may be relevant to the company's survival if you spent too much though.
  • Timoo - Wednesday, June 21, 2017 - link

    Unless & until you are in a semi-monopoly position. Then it doesn't matter any more; people NEED CPU's, no matter the price. And Intel díd exactly that: bringing a Gxx Pentium chip for 60$, to reap up the bottom lines of profits as well. They did not háve to lower their prices; demand in a monopoly situation is more constant than in a more open market.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    AMD was similarly aggressive in pricing high end chips 10-15 years ago when they were last competitive with Intel at the top of the stack. They need to offer a large price advantage to counter Intel's status as the default safe choice.
  • beginner99 - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    There will be no 14 cores. Only 16, 12 and 8 due to how the CCX and infinity fabric work. Eg. TR is 2 zeppelin dies which each has 2 ccx with 4 cores each. So 4 ccx total with 4 cores. All ccx need to have same config. So only 4, 8, 12, and 16 configs are possible. Hence 8-core will be at 1800x level (maybe even a bit cheaper) 12 core at $599 and 16-core at $849. There might be higher clocked binned parts in the middle just like with 1700, 1700x and 1800x.
  • Vatharian - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    I read 1998 around $850, 1998X "more".
  • mdw9604 - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Solid, inside source has the 16 core retail at $849
  • solnyshok - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    seems like a typo "It is worth notHing that we expect..."
  • Gothmoth - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    even when x399 cost 30-40% more than x299 boards the overall solution for a 12-16 core system would still be cheaper.
  • bananaforscale - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    "most configurations will allow three GPUs (totalling 48 lanes)"

    That's actually 40 lanes on the mobo. So, three GPUs and three M.2 drives leaves 8 free. Fixpls.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Could be worded better, but it's not wrong. 48 lines for GPUs allows 16/16/16 or 16/16/8/8 slot configurations. Either setup leaves 12 lanes for other purposes. 8 more for something else without a PLX would either require a 16/16/8 slot setup or 16/16/8/8 with the last slots lanes being shared.
  • LauRoman - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    What is the 4-pin power connector for?
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    More CPU power. A lot of boards for workstation class CPUs have 8+4 or 8+8 CPU power connections. I suspect it's less that a single 8pin CPU connector can't give enough power than that by spreading over more wires they can reduce voltage drop at full load slightly and deliver more stable power to the circuitry making the 1.xV power the CPU itself runs on.
  • crashtech - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    I'd rather see an E-ATX version, the gargantuan socket leaves little room for an overkill power delivery system like the X370 Taichi has. With 16 cores it would make sense to have beefier and cooler running VRMs, imo.
  • Xajel - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    ASUS has one and it's big and full of features..

    But honestly, I'd rather see a microATX one.. there's even no microATX AM4 out there that is worth considering...
  • Dave Null - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    Why does a workstation motherboard have "Gaming" and "Fatality" written on it? SMH.
  • HomeworldFound - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    "ASRock plans to offer two motherboards for AMD’s ThreadRipper CPUs: the X399 Professional Gaming and the X399 Taichi."

    I'd imagine that this is the professional gaming board.
  • chas_martel - Wednesday, June 7, 2017 - link

    I missed the demo...
  • azrael- - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    Wasn't there something about "Naples" (and by extension Threadripper) not really having a chipset? Most things are suppsoedly run directly off the CPU.
  • ddriver - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    The chipset is about peripherals only - sata, usb, audio and whatnot.
  • azrael- - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    I believe even SATA and USB is mostly run off the CPU. AMD claims "Naples" is a SoC.
  • ddriver - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link

    Some, but the mobo chipset supplies additional I/O.
  • Samus - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    "...which will nominally mean most configurations will allow three GPUs (totalling 48 lanes) and three M.2 slots (totalling 12 lanes) although the 10GbE controller will require some lanes as well as the other Ethernet and perhaps a USB port controller or two. Until we see the chipset diagram, it will be hard to tell at this point."

    No need for a chipset diagram. AMD has stated, and it is even referenced in this article, that the PCIe slots are electronically 16/16/8/8

    Three cards would only use 40 lanes, leaving enough headroom for three 4x m2's, 10Gbe, and so on.

    If all four slots were occupied, using 48 lanes, then you would have to sacrifice an m2 or (perhaps if possible) clock them at 2x to leave room for Gbe, USB 3.1, etc.
  • R3MF - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    "AMD has engineered the CPU to have 60 PCIe lanes for storage"

    We know that Ryzen has 24x PCIe 3.0 lanes:
    16x for GPU
    4x for NVMe M.2
    4x for chipset

    And that threadripper is two Ryzens on a single PCB.

    Explain the disparity?

    Does this imply that Ryzen actually has 32x PCIe 3.0 lanes to play with, but that Socket AM4 only exposes 24 of them?

    This would suggest that threadripper has:
    60x for GPU_Other IO
    4x for chipset

    Is that likely?
  • ddriver - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    Ryzen actually has 32 pci-e lanes in hardware. How much of those are available for use is a different subject.
  • R3MF - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    aha, thought this might be the case.
  • SaturnusDK - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    Surprising so few comments there are on the fantastic potential of this platform. With it's feature set and the CPUs coming for it, it is basically a direct replacement for a single core Xeon workstation platform. 48 PCIe 3.0 lanes dedicated to main PCie slots alone. Compare that to the maximum of 44 PCIe lanes total on the upcoming X299 platofrm for the Intel -X series and you can clearly see AMD isn't just aiming at the HEDT market but also the low-end workstation market. It's going to send shock waves through that market as that has pretty much always been dominated by Intel where their monopoly really reared it's ugly head as they commonly charge up to and above $9000 for their top range models. Remember that all Ryzen CPUs support ECC DDR4 RAM as well. It's not artificially disabled as on Intel CPUs and it comes with NVMe m.2 RAID capability right out of the box. Something you'll have to pay extra to get enabled on the X299 platform.

    All in all, Threadripper and the x399 is a comprehensive knock out blow to Intel. It'll be interesting if and when they will have an answer to AMDs performance lead.
  • ddriver - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link

    AMD is aiming VERY MUCH high end workstation, at least for a single socket config.
  • vred - Saturday, June 10, 2017 - link

    "Single core"? I don't think this means what you think this means.
  • BenJeremy - Monday, August 7, 2017 - link

    Where did you hear X399 supported NVMe RAID? I did a little digging, and apparently "not yet" is the answer. Another site mentions that AMD is supposed to enable this in the future, but no ETA.
  • SpetsnazAntiVIP - Sunday, June 11, 2017 - link

    Call me crazy, but I think workstation boards should include ipmi with virtual console.
  • BenJeremy - Monday, August 7, 2017 - link

    Intel X299 vs AMD X399

    Kind of funny that AMD stepped in and stole Intel's next chipset name, but also a bit confusing as well.

    No mention of RAID capabilities? I'd love to see AMD offer "free" RAID utilizing all those PCI-e lanes and smack Intel up side of their collective heads for pushing that VROC nonsense on their customers.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now