2 ms·

Not to mention the decision between more slower cores or less faster cores is a tough calculus for the market. For most use cases you want faster cores, even if

Not to mention the decision between more slower cores or less faster cores is a tough calculus for the market. For most use cases you want faster cores, even if you get less of them. Is this why we're seeing lackluster sales projections? Not sure, but its a concern. No gamer I know is lusting after the Ryzen. They want the faster per core i7. No Vmware admins I know want to migrate architectures unless they absolutely have to and Zen isn't that compelling right now. It might be with a price drop or faster per core performance. Ryzen is a good chip, but it may not be terribly competitive outside of edge cases, specialist builds, or as typical with AMD, budget builds with binned chips with failed cores sold as 3 or 4 core versions.

onli 9y ago
But that was in no way the market situation at release. AMD offered more cores, and each core was almost as strong as the Kaby Lake processors'. Exception being the very high clocked 7700K (but clock a Ryzen v2 might address). Now that Coffee Lake is released Intel also got a hexa-core against the Ryzen 5 1600, that one was eating their lunch until now. But even that i5 is not much stronger. The Ryzen 3s + the smaller Ryzen 5s (their 4 core offerings, 3 core offerings don't exist this time) are competitive against the i3s, though the Coffee Lake i3-8100 wins against the Ryzen 3s at least. No, this is not the strong suit this time, it is the middle class with the Ryzen 5 1600 (in all areas) and productivity with Ryzen 7. This is exactly why the mobile chips are so promising: This generation the single core performance is very good, energy-wise Ryzen looks nice as well, and the graphics AMD always did better. Raven Ridge APUs should make for very strong laptops.