By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Darc Requiem said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

I fully believe AMD will keep the hexacore as Ryzen 5 unless Intel drastically increases the core count on the Core Ultra 3 - or at least start making one in the first place. Intel hasn't made any Core Ultra 3 yet, just Core 3, and with an N before the number and just e-cores, those Core 3 are just rebranded Atoms now.

Ultra 5/7/9 are the new Core i3/5/7, and AMD made a similar shift upwards. In fact, they pretty much killed everything below the 5; so not just i3/Ultra 3/Ryzen 3, but also the Athlons and Celerons. All while the 5 stayed pretty much at the same price, meaning both Intel and AMD have pretty much killed the budget CPU segment now.

If the top Ryzen 9 SKU is 24 cores, there is no way the Ryzen 5 is only going be 6 cores. With 12 core CCD's, they are going to have a hard time getting a enough failed yields for 8 core chips. They are not going to be enough dies with at least 5 cores in the CCD to ship in volume anywhere close to Zen 6 launch. They aren't going to junk dies that could be used for 8 core or above chips just keep the Ryzen 5's at 6 cores.

I'll rephrase to show you the ranges I had in mind:

Ryzen 9: 24 cores, 20 cores, 16 cores

Ryzen 7: 12 cores, 10 cores

Ryzen 5: 8 cores, 6 cores

I mean, even the 7400 is a Ryzen 5. But it's so cut down it should have been a Ryzen 3 despite having 6 cores, as it has strongly reduced clock speeds (the 7600X has a higher base clock than this thing has turbo; even the mobile Ryzen 3 7440U boosts higher) and just half the L3 cache.

In other words, it's most likely based on the Zen4c and not the full-size Zen 4 cores. So despite the core count is the same, there should be big performance gap between this CPU and the rest of the Ryzen 5

Hence why I think the Ryzen 3 and Ultra 3 are dead and buried: They both rather pass them off as Ryzen/Ultra 5 even if functionally they would be a Ryzen/Ultra 3, if not even an Athlon/Celeron.