• capn_hector@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Launching the 5600x3d was always about controlling the price of 5800x3d. AMD did the same thing with the GRE series - the 7900 GRE was launched to halt the slide of 7900XT prices. And now that too has a bunch of volume after all.

    I said that when it was originally launched and people got real upset but there was never a stream of defective 6c dies to begin with, stacking happens after binning so they know it’s defective or not, and failures during stacking isn’t really a real thing that leaves you with any amount of functional cores. But people leaned on the microcenter dude saying it was a yield sku.

    Nor is it a failure of clocks etc. AMD doesn’t have any 6c zen3d epyc SKUs. They do have 2c and 4c stacks but they only made 6c stacks for the 5600x3d in the first pla - it was literally manufactured from scratch for the 5600x3d.

    People are dumb and put way too much faith in marketing statements.

    • gnocchicotti@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not uncommon for functioning dies to be cut down for market segmentation purposes. Intel had segmentation down to a science in the pre-Ryzen days. Like disabling hyperthreading and reducing cache for Core i5. Probably was rarely necessary because of actual defects, yet half or more of the chips got sold as some cut down variant, even when Intel’s yields were great.