AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***

[smilingcrow]

You know how AMD keep saying what is happening now and in the future is planed years, perhaps a decade in advanced?

2011: Accelerated Processing Unit (APU)
2014: Heterogeneous System Architecture (HSA)
2015: HBM
2016: Infinity Fabric
2019: Chiplet Architecture.

2021 it all comes together.

Nvidia are the ones that should really be concerned as they lack a CPU.
At 5nm it will be interesting to see how much performance AMD can squeeze out of a TDP limited APU.
They will be attacking Nvidia more from below than above, meaning with an APU not a dGPU.
If Intel do manage to impact Nvidia in the data centre then they will be losing there also.
Plus AMD's data centre plans have more options than Nvidia again due to having a CPU.
No wonder Intel decided to try and build a GPU.
I say try because, well who knows how that will go.

 

[BongoHunter]

For the moment Nvidia are safe without a CPU as their software ecosystem in the data center is so strong, you cannot get the same perf from AMD GPUs without extremely rare and hard to come by Devs, we have tried Radeon Instinct against a lot of Nvidia cards, but performance is poor due to the libs used not being able to fully exploit the power of the AMD hardware despite its superior specs in many cases. Intel AVX and Nvidia CUDA is easier to make use of than AMD GPUs purely due to the amount of effort big blue and big green are putting into the software side.

It's something AMD will be able to overcome - but it will take years at the current rate of development / investment

 

[chrcoluk]

If you think that's a huge upgrade what would say coming from an i7 920 is.

done similar already and was huge

from i5 750 (same gen as i7 920) to 2600X. difference is massive.

 

[humbug]

Nvidia are the ones that should really be concerned as they lack a CPU.
At 5nm it will be interesting to see how much performance AMD can squeeze out of a TDP limited APU.
They will be attacking Nvidia more from below than above, meaning with an APU not a dGPU.
If Intel do manage to impact Nvidia in the data centre then they will be losing there also.
Plus AMD's data centre plans have more options than Nvidia again due to having a CPU.
No wonder Intel decided to try and build a GPU.
I say try because, well who knows how that will go.

Intel tried to build a GPU before, Larrabee, it didn't go too well.

Should be different this time as Intel are actually building a GPU from the ground up and not some useless Frankenstein contraption like Larrabee.

Whether or not they can get the performance per Watt / cost of nVidia or even AMD 'as they are right now' remains to be seen, i hope they do well, we need the competition.

 

[Beren]

Interesting Adored TV vid - and it looks like other sources are slowly but surely backing up the idea that the 3600x, 3700x and potential 3850x are going to be very strong chips. There are going to be some very nervous Intel investors sitting out there right now.

If AMD can stack HBM on the IO die then the future is very bright for APU's - the only problem and it's a doozy is that they are still stuck on GCN. They need the next gen GPU process to be a proper upgrade and offer a much stronger performance/watt. If they can do that then they really could dominate the mid market with an APU that has enough HBM on board to properly feed the graphics cores and a very good performance from a 7nm+ Zen 3 chiplet. It is interesting to see that no-one is predicting much past 5.0ghz on the next node - that it is possible we could see higher efficiency but even some regression on total package speed.

The other issue of course is needing to keep the cost down, which with HBM has proven very tricky so far.

 

[Jokester]

At 1080p here would be no need for a dGPU.

 

[DarkHorizon472]

done similar already and was huge

from i5 750 (same gen as i7 920) to 2600X. difference is massive.

Did similar went from i5-760 to Ryzen 1700 and the difference is huge. The potential limitation is if something needs a very high single core speed but even at 3.7Ghz on all cores I have not found this a problem so far.

 

[Wommers]

Did similar went from i5-760 to Ryzen 1700 and the difference is huge. The potential limitation is if something needs a very high single core speed but even at 3.7Ghz on all cores I have not found this a problem so far.

I'm on a xeon 3470, going to upgrade to zen 2...I'm expecting 'a bit of a bump'

 

[Grim5]

As far as I can see a discrete GPU will always beat an integrated one as it can be bigger and have greater cooling. That's not to say most people wouldn't be happy out with a cheap but moderately powerful integrated GPU.

Integrated works on consoles it can work on desktops too

However consoles use special motherboards.

I wouldt mind at all if amd sold a console like motherboard that has the cpu and gpu baked into it, as in all the parts are soldered to the board and it’s really a easy plug and play putting it into your system

 

[Mercutio]

Agreed. I'd be more than happy to see one core at that speed. Whatever happens this will be a huge upgrade on my 2500K.

Older post I'm replying to but this.

You'll either have stuff that's NOT multicore aware, in which case XFR2+PB gives you 1-2 high speed cores to run it on OR you have multi-core aware, in which case you have a buttload of decent cores. Either way, I think chasing clock speed for a gaming rig is probably the way forward (maybe the 3700X if the 3850X doesn't happen/is saved to counter an Intel release), it'll be 12c/24t 5 ghz, possibly a small IPC boost on top and £300ish, that beats a future Intel 12c release on value by quite a bit while probably beating it in most benchmarks too (nothing nailed down there ofc). Intel would have to charge the wrong side of £500 at least for a 12c core, possibly £600 as yields will be so low until they get some form of chiplet design running.

 

[Mercutio]

Integrated works on consoles it can work on desktops too

However consoles use special motherboards.

I wouldt mind at all if amd sold a console like motherboard that has the cpu and gpu baked into it, as in all the parts are soldered to the board and it’s really a easy plug and play putting it into your system

Selling a "9900k+1070/1080ish" all in one (like Intel NUC) would see them sell pooloads (eh, at least reasonably) as a high end "pc bang" type gaming cafe machine. A decent, one off machine would likely suit a lot of "less than enthusiast" types.

 

[Beren]

Definitely, but that is going to be called a PS5...

 

[Rroff]

Integrated works on consoles it can work on desktops too

However consoles use special motherboards.

I wouldt mind at all if amd sold a console like motherboard that has the cpu and gpu baked into it, as in all the parts are soldered to the board and it’s really a easy plug and play putting it into your system

Consoles also tend to use a very different architecture with the use of highspeed caches such as edram and not well suited to a more general purpose desktop system/OS.

 

[Participant]

I'm quite excited about the mini PC potential of this new product range.

I have a media / gaming mini ITX PC in my sitting room for 4k films and so the kids can play Lego Avengers etc. at 1080p. It's running a Q6600 fanless and a 1050.

I could wack a 6 core Zen2 and a Navi 12 in there for not very much and have a (I hope) cool quiet beast sitting there for not much money.

Don't want a PS5 as I want one media box to be able to do everything and be customisable etc.

 

[beany_bot]

2 weeks to go guys.

Is anyone like me, I'm kinda excited, but also a little bit sad re the future of gaming.
It looks like we are going to get yet more cores from AMD. Which obviously I am happy about. But in truth won't make a massive difference in gaming. Not nearly as much as if they were releasing say a 6ghz 2700x.

It just looks like the industry (intel included) is now heading for a industry of increasing core counts. (Zen 3 rumours about 4 threads per core) Alas this doesn't actually really help game FPS at all.

Everyone one is excited about Zen 2, and I am, but I'm struggling to get that excited. Because unlike days of old I just know that it won't make that much difference to gaming.

 

[Bluntwrapped]

The most exciting part of all of this IMO is the pricing can’t wait to see exactly how they stack against the 9900k and how Intel respond.

 

[beany_bot]

The most exciting part of all of this IMO is the pricing can’t wait to see exactly how they stack against the 9900k and how Intel respond.

Intels response.

 

[Grim5]

The most exciting part of all of this IMO is the pricing can’t wait to see exactly how they stack against the 9900k and how Intel respond.

There is only one way to respond and that’s price drops

 

[~>Dg<~]

Selling a "9900k+1070/1080ish" all in one (like Intel NUC) would see them sell pooloads (eh, at least reasonably) as a high end "pc bang" type gaming cafe machine. A decent, one off machine would likely suit a lot of "less than enthusiast" types.

they have been doing this before for eg https://smallformfactor.net/news/colorfuls-b150-motherboard-integrated-gtx-1070

 

[FoxEye]

2 weeks to go guys.

Is anyone like me, I'm kinda excited, but also a little bit sad re the future of gaming.
It looks like we are going to get yet more cores from AMD. Which obviously I am happy about. But in truth won't make a massive difference in gaming. Not nearly as much as if they were releasing say a 6ghz 2700x.

It just looks like the industry (intel included) is now heading for a industry of increasing core counts. (Zen 3 rumours about 4 threads per core) Alas this doesn't actually really help game FPS at all.

Everyone one is excited about Zen 2, and I am, but I'm struggling to get that excited. Because unlike days of old I just know that it won't make that much difference to gaming.

We just have to get better at using more cores.

There are some things (like collision detection) that have to be done sequentially, but I'm sure there are plenty of avenues for improvement, where cores can be better utilised.