facebook rss twitter

Dell starts to list PC systems with an AMD Ryzen 7 5800 option

by Mark Tyson on 22 February 2021, 13:11

Tags: Dell (NASDAQ:DELL), AMD (NYSE:AMD)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qaep77

Add to My Vault: x

AMD has been rather slow to follow up on the initial volley of AMD Ryzen 5000 desktop processors in November last year. On one hand this is good, if it means it can catch up with supply side demands quicker by concentrating on fewer SKUs. On the other hand, we'd like to know what is in the pipeline, naturally. Moreover, some people might be waiting out for a particular successor – I've noticed quite a few people have a Ryzen 5 5600 on their wish lists (non-X version) for example.

With the above in mind, it is good to see that at least one giant OEM is starting to offer build to order desktop PCs with previously unreleased Ryzen 5000 CPUs. Perhaps the flood gates are going to open with this and more SKUs just ahead of the Intel Rocket Lake-S launch.

Ghost Motley on Twitter spotted that Dell has started to list systems with an AMD Ryzen 7 5800 option. The listing (screenshot above) seems to be in error in one way – why would Dell Alienware Canada be the exclusive launch partner for this chip? However, it can be quite certain this isn't a typo because as you can see in the screenshot the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 option is listed between the 5600X and 5800X processor options sitting comfortably with the other choices CAD$150 either side.

That's not all, the Alienware Aurora R10 Ryzen Edition Gaming Desktop confirms a little bit of spec with this processor choice. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 option has the same 8-cores, 36MB of total cache as the 5800X but just a slight drop in boost speed of 4.6GHz (rather than 4.7GHz). Not a terrible sacrifice to save CAD$150. Remember though, that in our CES report on these processors, and the AMD listing, the base clock is just 3.4GHz (rather than 3.8GHz). These base clock reductions are a key factor in the non-X models achieving a 65W rather than 105W TDP.

Back at CES 2021 AMD gave a passing mention to the Ryzen 9 5900 and Ryzen 7 5800 (non X versions) and mentioned at the time they were 65W processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 and 5900 are not listed with 'PIB' details on the official product pages as they are destined to be OEM only unless you live in a region where such products can become available anyway. Now, at last, it seems like OEMs are starting to roll them out.

HEXUS Forums :: 13 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Posted by Tunnah - Mon 22 Feb 2021 13:13
I wonder why they didn't go with 5700X
Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH - Mon 22 Feb 2021 14:29
Tunnah
I wonder why they didn't go with 5700X

Because AMD can sell the Ryzen 7 5800X for more money?? Also they can have more relaxed binning requirements too.
Posted by trillo_del_diavolo - Mon 22 Feb 2021 14:43
Well, you don't really need a thousand SKUs with subtle differences in the same price bracket, they might not even have enough defective dies for that. Confusopolies are bad enough as they are.
Posted by DanceswithUnix - Mon 22 Feb 2021 14:51
Tunnah
I wonder why they didn't go with 5700X

Perhaps, and I say this as a very happy 3700X owner, because the 3700X numbering is really stupid. A 65W version of the 3800X should have been a 3800. Like the 3600 is a 65W 3600X. Or a 3900 is a 65W 3900X.
3700X should really have been some other core configuration, reduce the cache or knock out the threading, possibly with a 3700 65W variant.

So perhaps they figured they would fix the numbering here, rather than dragging the stupidity on. I mean, they go from 6 cores to 16 cores using 5 numbers and sometimes slap an X on the end, it doesn't sound hard.
Posted by Tunnah - Mon 22 Feb 2021 15:06
CAT-THE-FIFTH
Because AMD can sell the Ryzen 7 5800X for more money?? Also they can have more relaxed binning requirements too.

Eh ? I meant instead of 5800, why not name it 5700X as it's the successor to the 3700X. Also people will link the names as the 3700X was a massively popular part

DanceswithUnix
Perhaps, and I say this as a very happy 3700X owner, because the 3700X numbering is really stupid. A 65W version of the 3800X should have been a 3800. Like the 3600 is a 65W 3600X. Or a 3900 is a 65W 3900X.
3700X should really have been some other core configuration, reduce the cache or knock out the threading, possibly with a 3700 65W variant.

So perhaps they figured they would fix the numbering here, rather than dragging the stupidity on. I mean, they go from 6 cores to 16 cores using 5 numbers and sometimes slap an X on the end, it doesn't sound hard.


I always thought they did the numbering so different so the price difference was subconsciously not as bad, because the price difference is NUTS lol

Although now that I think about it, it makes more sense to call it 5800 because people link the X to a better part, so if they see 5700X they'll think it's just as good as 5800X, but if they see 5800 they'll think it's sub par next to the 5800X, like something is missing.

SEE NEWER »