Those were the quad cores - yes, Q6600 and Q9000 series. Two dual-core chips glued together and seen as a quad-core by Windows
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
Those were the quad cores - yes, Q6600 and Q9000 series. Two dual-core chips glued together and seen as a quad-core by Windows
Those were the quad cores - yes, Q6600 and Q9000 series. Two dual-core chips glued together and seen as a quad-core by Windows
The point was that it looked too small for the new Xeon
Which is 2 x 700mm + extra space
100% agree, that's why i asked because i doubt anyone thought that Zen2 desktop would get Uncore in the die. We already knew that Epyc would. Exciting times ahead me thinks
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Few things from the slides and Anandtech site.
AMD state "Industry leading performance" that is a bold claim.
They also claim "the competition cannot compete with this performance" again another huge claim.
The Chiplet design with the larger central controller chip looks good, but another claim of "competition will adopt the same" is another bold claim.
Seems a lot of claims from AMD, hope for once they are able to back them up.
>25% performance uplift... That is anyone's guess how it actually pans out on a desktop CPU..
AMD state "Industry leading performance" that is a bold claim.
They also claim "the competition cannot compete with this performance" again another huge claim.
The Chiplet design with the larger central controller chip looks good, but another claim of "competition will adopt the same" is another bold claim.
Seems a lot of claims from AMD, hope for once they are able to back them up.
>25% performance uplift... That is anyone's guess how it actually pans out on a desktop CPU..
They are backed claims though. Intel has no CPU to compete with the 7601 (Naples) let alone Rome.
On the presentation 2 days ago, Intel 48 core (2 x 24 core) CPU (doesn't support HT), beat the 7601 only because on the small print of the test, they had turned off SMT on the EPYC CPU.
Crippling it just to prove that 48 cores are better than 32!!!!!!
Intel is going to have to get cheap glue, because already one such die is expensive to make...The point was that it looked too small for the new Xeon
Even if they weren't short of manufacturing capacity.
Now they have to glue together two expensive dies.
Data centers are all about more cores/threads.
And Intel just can't go and increase die size.
They don't even have smaller node available in some time.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Wow Rome just killed it... PCIE 4 as well.. hopefully that means we get the same on Zen2, definitely buying a 3700x next year and an x570 mobo if it's pcie4 as well.
If 3700X is an 8-core, I will skip it.
10% faster vs 2 8180 while is still an early prototype!!!!
The 2x 8180 cost around £20K on their own for heaven sake.
From the perspective of the average consumer/enthusiast, the take from that presentation is that Zen2 if configured the same as the EPYC counterparts will offer 25% more performance than the previous generation. So a 2700X with a 105W TDP would be a 3700X with 105W TDP but 25% faster either clock for clock, or a combination of IPC and clock speed increase. Needless to say 25% is certainly not an insignificant amount, and would allows AMD to overtake Intel in the desktop enthusiast space for the first time in a long, long time, assuming the 25% increase is average across different workloads not very specific ones.
The only thing AMD really need to improve on to break the big OEM's is more, and better CPU with iGPU's or APU's. Laptops are becoming much more common but the limited selection of desktop equivalents, but pushing systems with discrete graphics cards is a hard sell where the 2200G(E)/2400G(E) is not enough to make large inroads, the Athlons will help at the very low end but there are a few gaps to fill.
The only thing AMD really need to improve on to break the big OEM's is more, and better CPU with iGPU's or APU's. Laptops are becoming much more common but the limited selection of desktop equivalents, but pushing systems with discrete graphics cards is a hard sell where the 2200G(E)/2400G(E) is not enough to make large inroads, the Athlons will help at the very low end but there are a few gaps to fill.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,336
- Location
- Planet Earth
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,178
- Location
- Rollergirl
Does the PCIE4 mean x470 will not be compatible with 3700x?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,336
- Location
- Planet Earth
Look at the picture above. The controller die for 8 chiplets is large,so I expect for consumer CPUs it will somewhat smaller. It might mean to save on die space,the 7NM Ryzen might stick to PCI-E 3.0 IMHO.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Why? It's not like 8c/16t is being hammered in all desktop scenarios right now? If you need more then you should be on HEDT..
The minute 8c/16t is getting thrashed by your average game then it's time to get more cores..
Hell most people are still on 4c, its only recently that games started really making use of more cores and even now most still don't.
I don't see games going past 8c/16t level of performance for a good few years yet
AMD are miles ahead of Intel right now, a gain of 25% puts AMD a long way ahead. Assuming AMD don't use the lead to nvidiaize prices of course.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
PCIE 4.0 should be backwards compatible with PCIE 3 etc so I wouldn't worry, what it means is If you want to run a pcie 4 GPU you will need a mobo that supports it, but your CPU will be ready to support it.
If Zen2 is 8c per die, then that should mean the equivalent 2700x will be a single chip CPU, which should mean latency should be much more improved over the 2700x etc.
Coupled with the >25% performance increase we could be seeing something truly beastly from 7nm.
Like for like the replacement for the 2700x could be staggeringly better performance
3700X will fit in X470 but it won't support PCI4.0 probably.