PS. Pricey graphics cards from Nvidia may actually help AMD CPU sales in the gaming segment, as wise gamers know that they can achieve better performance by saving a little on CPU and put the savings towards a high-end GPU. From the same thread at Overclockers forums:
"I just don't know what to do. For a purely gaming rig I know that Intel mainstream will likely produce the best performance. I remember switching from a 6700k to a 5820k thinking I'd notice an improvement and I didn't, like at all. I imagine the 7820x would be that scenario all over again, no improvement at all with 2 extra cores over the mainstream i7. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't tempted by Ryzen, but I suffer from buyers remorse, and even if I was only 10fps short on a benchmark, I'd be wishing I had the cpu with better results (as silly as it sounds). However with my budget, I could build a Ryzen rig that would allow me to use the difference saved and pick up a 1080ti. The sensible part of me realises that a 1700 and 1080ti is going to be better than an i7 and 1080 at higher resolutions. Infact using my intel logic above I even thought about saving even more and going with a 1600, as 8 cores just aren't needed for gaming (by the time they are we'll be 3 or 4 cpu generations forward at least), and we know for certain the 8700k isn't going to be anywhere near the Ryzen 5 in price....Decisions, decisions.... "
Some, admittedly selected, comments from the same thread:
"Been 5 years since my build, and motherboard is starting to die, I've held off for gen8 and now looking at the prices, I'm wondering if Ryzen is really good option to go to. I'm going full spec with a 1080 ti for gaming at 4k and I do a fair amount of video editing."
"I'm 95% certain I'm going Ryzen instead of 8700k or X299 platform now. The upgrade path is more wallet friendly and gaming at 1440p; it's more GPU orientated anyway and am I really going to notice the difference between the chips with a 1080Ti for example?"
Agree. The 8-gen, with more cores and good frequency, is admittedly an substantial improvement on the 7-gen. The higher launch price may give way to more competitive pricing as soon as volume is up. And more budget friendly platform options will arrive as well. Still, with more cores and threads, Ryzen remains in the game, and will probably be competing fiercely on price, if need be, to maintain and increase share.
I will keep an eye on the Mindshare statistics throughout Q4 to see how the battle unfolds.
Preliminary estimates based on internal testing show integer throughput performance comparable to Intel Xeon Platinum Series at significantly lower power. At the 2017 Linley Processor Conference this week, we will share additional details about the SoC foundational elements and how they address the needs of cloud datacenter workloads:
Stretching for the semiconductor industry’s highest-hanging fruit, Qualcomm’s new ARMv8 Centriq processor is targeting Intel’s 99% dominance of the server market. Arriving later this year, Centriq will shake Intel’s tree in the hope that some of the high-margin fruit will fall into its waiting ARMs. The new Falkor CPU is a core part of this strategy.
Falkor resembles the ARM-compatible CPUs that Qualcomm formerly designed for its Snapdragon smartphone processors but adds some higher-performance features. In one major departure, it ditches 32-bit compatibility altogether in favor of software written only for the Aarch64 instruction set.
Centriq is designed mainly for cloud-service providers (CSPs) that need bushels of power-efficient parallelism to run numerous virtual machines for their remote clients. Sampling for almost a year, the 64-bit chips are scheduled to begin production in 4Q17.
The Centriq 2400 has 48 cores, far more than any Intel or AMD server processor. Qualcomm boasts that Centriq is the first server processor manufactured in 10nm FinFET technology, but this foundry process (likely Samsung’s) is similar to Intel’s current 14nm technology. Qualcomm has been vague about the chip’s clock speed and says only that it will exceed 2.0GHz—not exactly a speed demon for a chip manufactured in a next-generation IC process.
Falkor is not a Xeon-class CPU, as it lags Skylake in both superscalar decoding and instruction-reordering capacity, among other metrics. Thus, it’s best suited to applications with lightweight threads. It should be appealing for some data-center applications, particularly if the price is low. Like other ARM server vendors, Qualcomm will probably need more than one generation to produce a truly competitive server processor.