It's not about speed limits so much as how a certain bandwidth is achieved efficiently.Maybe for next LPDDR6, JEDEC shouldn't put a max speed limit for LPDDR standard
Exactly.Yes, it will be expensive. It's basically a Gaming Laptop/Desktop Replacement SoC. Not different from what PS5 or XSX does (Big APUs).
I don't think reheated is the correct term.I think the only way it's possibly true is if Fire Range isn't reheated Granite Ridge, as Dragon Range is reheated Raphael.
7950X is currently around $620.If 9950X is supposed to be $999 for 16C Zen5, and Strix Halo also has 16C Zen5 but in addition 40-50 TOPS NPU + 40 CU RDNA 3.5 + 3x memory bandwidth + advanced packaging, then Strix Halo should be quite a lot more expensive.
So the Strix Halo CPU alone ought to be between perhaps $1200-1500. Then the cost of everything else that the laptop consists of must be added on top of that (display, SSD, RAM , keyboard, battery, ...). Adding all of this up means Strix Halo based laptops should be really expensive.
While I agree with the general reasoning, a friendly reminder that BOM cost is a thing, manufacturing costs are another thing and finally production costs are again another thing (and in most of countries, no company is legally allowed to sell at less than the manufacturing cost). They are related, but without knowing the cost accounting structure and the additional manufacturing costs (labour, depreciation, overheads, tooling, testing and binning, etc.) is very difficult to establish if and how much room AMD has really to further lowering prices in the client space, even if they would be willing to (and I suspect they won't because of margins).7950X is currently around $620.
You can buy a BD790i, which is a 7945HX mini-itx motherboard with included heatsink for $520.
The 7945HX is dragon range, a repackaged 7950X for mobile.
You seem to think the mobile variants cost the OEMs similar price as retail desktop parts. The reality is they pay so little they can sell that entire MB set for less, which includes offering warranty and everything.
The BOM on the 7950X was estimated to be $70 per Ian Cuttress, which means AMD has a whole lot of leeway on cutting deals for OEMs.
Strix halo won't be different. Sure, BOM will be higher. But not so high an OEM will have to pay $1200-1500 for it. Not even close.
So it's not going to compete with RTX 4060/4070 gaming laptops found at ~$1200I expect Strix Halo to be mainly in $2k+ laptops. Or at least that's the idea.
So it's not going to compete with RTX 4060/4070 gaming laptops found at ~$1200
Latency used to be significantly higher, at least in number of cycles.LPDDR defeats DDR, and takes the throne:
The LPCAMM standard opens the door for LPDDR to dominate desktops.
That's my expectation as well, but I still hope to be wrong.I expect Strix Halo to be mainly in $2k+ laptops. Or at least that's the idea.
But apparently there will be no competition, so you will indeed pay arm and leg for it, and will actually run to do so and do so happily, cause 40 percent SPECINT perf increase is so good i guess, that you will never need faster computer after this.Strix halo won't be different. Sure, BOM will be higher. But not so high an OEM will have to pay $1200-1500 for it. Not even close.
I've not specified any price that I think ODMs pay for Strix Halo.Firstly: you're overestimating (by a lot) how much Strix Halo would cost ODMs.
Secondly, why are you assuming ODMs would be sold 9950Xs for MSRP?
Yes, agreed. I also think the suggested $999 price for 9950X is too high.According to the gospel of adroc. He will be wrong about that just like the April release. Slowly but surely all of his talking points are falling apart.
SFF PCs containing Strix Halo has been discussed earlier in this thread. Here's one example:Expected by whom? To me, it seems as it would be an economically difficult venture to sideline this chip off of premium laptops to a product category such as x86 SFF PCs. (Does a category of "premium SFF PCs" even exist in x86 land? That's the land in which customers who require workstation PCs can actually buy workstation PCs, rather than having to make do with SFF PCs.)
You can't simultaneously say this whilst also claiming this:I've not specified any price that I think ODMs pay for Strix Halo.
And I'm not assuming ODMs would be sold 9950Xs for MSRP.
Did you not even read the post you quoted from me? This is what it said:
"Sure, but it’s the same when stores & ODMs buy separate desktop CPUs such as 9950X from AMD too. The price they pay will be lower than retail, and different stores & ODMs will get different price from AMD."
If you recognise the pricing for ODMs is totally detached from the pricing of consumer retail parts.Yes, agreed. I also think the suggested $999 price for 9950X is too high.
And that was part of the point with using that CPU as a base to show what it would mean for other CPUs such as Strix Halo. Strix Halo is basically 16C Zen5 like 9950X, but in addition it has lots of other goodies, so it'll cost even more (when adding up the price that ODMs pay for the CPU + ODM markup + store markup, when products containing that CPU are sold in retail stores). And then laptops with Strix Halo would be very expensive as result.
So it all bounces back to questioning whether $999 for 9950X is realistic.
Not sure what I mean. It's exactly what I wrote. I.e. ODMs obviously pay less that retail price for computer parts such as CPU.If you recognise the pricing for ODMs is totally detached from the pricing of consumer retail parts.
So if you agree that you can't compare the price an ODM pays for STX-Halo to the retail price of a 9950X, then we agree that STX-Halo cannot be used to determine if a $999 MSRP is realistic or not. That's the next logical step, no?Not sure what I mean. It's exactly what I wrote. I.e. ODMs obviously pay less that retail price for computer parts such as CPU.
But you cannot compare ODM price of Strix Halo to end customer price for 9950X, and thereby conclude that Strix Halo is cheaper than 9950X. Not a fair comparison. The closest would instead be to use ODM price for Strix Halo + ODM markup + store markup, when a product containing that CPU is sold in a retail store. Then it would be roughly comparable to 9950X end customer retail price.
The assumption is that ODMs will pay more for Strix Halo than for 9950X when they buy those CPUs from AMD, since both CPUs use 16C Zen5 but Strix Halo has lots of extras.So if you agree that you can't compare the price an ODM pays for STX-Halo to the retail price of a 9950X, then we agree that STX-Halo cannot be used to determine if a $999 MSRP is realistic or not. That's the next logical step, no?
The assumption is that ODMs will pay more for Strix Halo than for 9950X when they buy those CPUs from AMD, since both CPUs use 16C Zen5 but Strix Halo has lots of extras.
If that is the case, then "ODM price for Strix Halo + ODM markup + store markup" will also be higher than "ODM price for 9950X + ODM markup + store markup". I.e. Strix Halo will also be more expensive than 9950X when sold in retail (as part of a product).
But you could of course argue that ODMs will pay less for Strix Halo than for 9950X when they buy those CPUs from AMD. Is that's what you're saying, and in that case why do you think that would be reasonable when Strix Halo has lots of extras compared to 9950X?
How it works, what ODMs pay, is exactly the same situation as with Intel, Nvidia, any other company on the market.The assumption is that ODMs will pay more for Strix Halo than for 9950X when they buy those CPUs from AMD, since both CPUs use 16C Zen5 but Strix Halo has lots of extras.
If that is the case, then "ODM price for Strix Halo + ODM markup + store markup" will also be higher than "ODM price for 9950X + ODM markup + store markup". I.e. Strix Halo will also be more expensive than 9950X when sold in retail (as part of a product).
But you could of course argue that ODMs will pay less for Strix Halo than for 9950X when they buy those CPUs from AMD. Is that's what you're saying, and in that case why do you think that would be reasonable when Strix Halo has lots of extras compared to 9950X?
It's a laptop part first and foremost. Anything past that is an incredibly niche usecase, frankly.It seems more like a professional part for CAD users and that sort than anyone else. I can't think of many users who would want both 16 CPU cores and 40 graphics cores as a desktop replacement.
I can't think of any business or corporation that wants to replace their old machines with new and more expensive slower ones.I can't think of many users who would want both 16 CPU cores and 40 graphics cores as a desktop replacement.
Latency used to be significantly higher, at least in number of cycles.
Unless AMD and Intel both switch to LPDDR at the same time. Which is possible, especially if "the industry" essentially nudges them in that direction by making DDR6 loaded up with features that are mostly specific to servers. Not that I'm saying with absolute confidence that DDR6 will turn out that way, but hey, it might.Latency on LPDDR is still huge (1.5x over regular, last time I checked?), and capacity is smaller than DDR. Whoever first switches to LPDDR (AMD or Intel) would automatically lose to the competition's CPU with regular DDR memory. I preduict CAMM with DDR6 will be the main desktop form factor.