AMD Announces Ryzen PRO 8840 & PRO 8000G Series CPUs

[brad0]

Has Wifi 7 been finalised yet?

Yes, 3 months ago.

[coder]

I bought my old Pro for ECC support and when it came time to by RAM it was the middle of the pandemic meaning ECC prices were sky high and I ended up with regular RAM ....

Last year would've been a good time to replace it. I haven't tracked DDR4 prices, but DDR5 is definitely starting to go back up.

[skeevy420]

Last year would've been a good time to replace it. I haven't tracked DDR4 prices, but DDR5 is definitely starting to go back up.

Last year I found an New (open box) 7800X3D for $303 at the Bay of E. Last year was a damn good time for upgrading.

NM64

Nope. It's my backup system. I assume all the Zen 2 and better APUs, 4000 series and up, are selling well and high because they're really good for what they offer. They do everything the average person needs to do up to and including lower spec gaming and the Pro models have things like ECC on top of that. It's not that crazy that the 4650G and 4750G are starting around $120 (that's what I'd want for my 4650G that I paid almost $270 for).

[NM64]

It's not that crazy that the 4650G and 4750G are starting around $120 (that's what I'd want for my 4650G

I fully understand wanting to get the most money for one's product when trying to sell, but I'm genuinely wanting to gain understanding with regards to this $120 price point.

My main reason for wanting to gain better understanding is because a new 5500GT, used 5700G, and used 8500G (very recent single sold listing, either indicates a fluke or it quickly losing value) can be had around that same price-point.

For context, used Xeon E-2146G and used Xeon W-1250 (that being 6c/12t Sky/Kaby/Coffee/Comet Lake) have bottom-end pricing around that $120 yet the i7-8700 non-K seems to be more like $90.

Do pro features really command that much of a premium when not in the bargin-basement range? Perhaps my perspective is skewed because, once you get below $50, the pro models usually were the cheaper option, like you can get the Xeon equivalent of a non-K 4c/8t Haswell i7 for like all of 20 bucks now and its these dirt-cheap Xeon CPUs that were my bread-and-butter (I've now bought three of them in the last 8 years: a Core 2 Quad equivalent, an LGA1156 Nehalem i7 equivalent, and an LGA1150 Haswell i7 equivalent).

And, because I'm also a semi-retro emulation enthusiast, Haswell actually would have similar if not better CPU performance than Zen2 APUs unless emulating something that wants more than 4 cores (emulation was basically one of Zen's worst-case scenarios until Zen3 whereby Zen1 & Zen+ are slower than Haswell while non-APU Zen2 matches Haswell, and that's farther amplified with emulation being pretty much one of if not the best-case scenario for Haswell with is seeing 30+% clock-for-clock uplift over Ivy Bridge weirdly enough)

[grung]

I'm looking forward to System76 using one of these chips.

I just looked at their latest AMD laptop. Pangolin with a 7840U and see they went from 144hz to 60hz. Wondering what's up with that.

I have one with 144hz and I think this refresh rate was only good thing about this laptop. I wouldn't buy this thing with my own money
Laptop without usb 4 or thunderbolt is a joke.

[skeevy420]

I fully understand wanting to get the most money for one's product when trying to sell, but I'm genuinely wanting to gain understanding with regards to this $120 price point.

My main reason for wanting to gain better understanding is because a new 5500GT, used 5700G, and used 8500G (very recent single sold listing, either indicates a fluke or it quickly losing value) can be had around that same price-point.

For context, used Xeon E-2146G and used Xeon W-1250 (that being 6c/12t Sky/Kaby/Coffee/Comet Lake) have bottom-end pricing around that $120 yet the i7-8700 non-K seems to be more like $90.

Do pro features really command that much of a premium when not in the bargin-basement range? Perhaps my perspective is skewed because, once you get below $50, the pro models usually were the cheaper option, like you can get the Xeon equivalent of a non-K 4c/8t Haswell i7 for like all of 20 bucks now and its these dirt-cheap Xeon CPUs that were my bread-and-butter (I've now bought three of them in the last 8 years: a Core 2 Quad equivalent, an LGA1156 Nehalem i7 equivalent, and an LGA1150 Haswell i7 equivalent).

And, because I'm also a semi-retro emulation enthusiast, Haswell actually would have similar if not better CPU performance than Zen2 APUs unless emulating something that wants more than 4 cores (emulation was basically one of Zen's worst-case scenarios until Zen3 whereby Zen1 & Zen+ are slower than Haswell while non-APU Zen2 matches Haswell, and that's farther amplified with emulation being pretty much one of if not the best-case scenario for Haswell with is seeing 30+% clock-for-clock uplift over Ivy Bridge weirdly enough)

It's because if you're buying a Pro APU then you usually have a specific goal in mind. If you have a specific goal then you'll pay a premium for a part. Mine was ECC for my ZFS pools but ECC was such a premium at the time that it ended up not being worth it. It's nice to know that I have it as an option should I decide to turn it into a file server one of these days.

If you don't have a specific goal that needs the Pro features then you're just as well off with the equivalent G, X or standard CPU or APU based on your graphical needs. Maybe better off if you want to overclock since the Pro ones have limited overclocking features in the name of better stability.

Another major factor that commands the premium prices with Pro models is that AMD doesn't always sell Pro models to the general public. That limits the supply to allow them to sell for more than the non-Pro variants when they sell used. I bought mine grey market from a reseller out of Hong Kong.

$120 is a damn good price at this time for an 8500G. It's $180 new and maybe $10 or $20 cheaper used. They're selling for the prices they are because the 8500G used was a fluke price like my $303 7800X3D, the 5500GT is two gens older than the 8500G which is why there's a $50 price difference between their new prices, yet both are so new that they haven't depreciated in value enough to take advantage in the used market outside of getting lucky. Give either a few more months and they'll drop in price like most other lower end APUs tend to do.

The 5700G is an 8 core model. There's a hefty increase in price when you go from 6 to 8 cores with AMD APUs buying new and that's reflected in their used prices.

[NM64]

If you don't have a specific goal that needs the Pro features then you're just as well off with the equivalent G, X or standard CPU or APU based on your graphical needs.

My storage requirements are really not much, but I've ran into the likes of bit rot, disc rot, and data corruption during some data transfer over a decade ago that has made me look more into the likes of ECC among other things even just for normal day-to-day use PCs because, as long as you're not on the newest platform, there's barely a price premium for unbuffered ECC RAM—especially with the used market.

It started back because AM2 and AM3 commonly allowed the combination of integrated graphics, ECC support, and CPU performance that wasn't some Atom-level trash. But since the 2010s you basically couldn't get that anymore without shelling out for expensive workstation Intel motherboards since AM3+ rarely had an iGPU and FM2/+ didn't support ECC.

They're selling for [$120] because the 8500G used was a fluke price like my $303 7800X3D

Maybe, maybe not. I'm just not comfortable being certain on calling it a fluke because, remember, the 8500G is 2x Zen4+4x Zen4c, has a crippled iGPU (about the same graphics performance as the 5600G/5700G), and has only 4x PCIe 4.0 lanes for a dGPU. This makes it considerably less valuable on the used market due to reduced relevant use-cases compared to the 8600G and, amusingly, would actually be a great candidate for my own use-case if not for the lack of ECC and the general irk-some-ness that is Pluton for Linux users like us.

the 5500GT is two gens older than the 8500G which is why there's a $50 price difference between their new prices.
...
The 5700G is an 8 core model. There's a hefty increase in price when you go from 6 to 8 cores with AMD APUs buying new and that's reflected in their used prices.

Of course a new 8500G is going to be more expensive as would more cores also result in a price premium—I was looking at what would match that ~$120 price-point which means a new 5500GT, a used 5700G, and (possibly) a used 8500G.

Also it's only a single gen in difference for the CPU cores—Zen3 (5500GT/5700G) vs Zen4 (8500G) since Zen3+ only provided power and thermal improvements (not IPC) which only really results in a performance increase in mobile form-factors since Zen isn't the blast furnace that is Intel's desktop portfolio. Now, yes, it's a 2 generation difference in graphics performance (Vega vs RDNA3) resulting in around twice the performance per CU but, as stated, the crippled iGPU of only 4CUs on the 8500G makes have around the same graphics performance as the 5500GT/5700G anyway.