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

[LePhuronn]

although I am basing that on believing AMD will keep the best 3800's to use as 3850's (so they're pre-binned).

That's always been my logic, essentially the 8700K/8086K but in reverse. My belief is the new Ryzen 9 SKU is a 16c/32t affair with a boost of 4.9GHz, so your standard CPU is the 3800X. However AMD kick off their 50th anniversary celebrations with an industry-crushing 16c/32t CPU with a 5.1GHz boost called the 3850X (50 for the anniversary) and released as a limited edition. That way the super golden sample 8 core, 5.1GHz capable chiplets can be batched up (AMD would "only" need 100,000 of these for a limited 50,000 unit run) and sold over a couple of months, all the while the 8 core chiplets that didn't quite get to 5.1GHz are prepped for the standard 3800X.

Then when the anniversary allocation is done, the 3800X is released and the binning only need continue for 4.9GHz boost. Of course, you could still win the silicon lottery and get a 5GHz or 5.1GHz capable boost in that, but the sheen and bragging rights of the anniversary edition is limited. It's the same with the 8086K - before and after it existed you still had common 8700Ks hitting and surpassing the 8086K's clocks.

So yes, AMD will still have those 5.1GHz golden chiplets come up, but they're not being as painstaking with their binning process since the big PR exercise that is/was the 3850X is done and dusted. But then again, who knows. I think the concept of the 3850X being an anniversary edition is entirely of my own fevered mind, simply because I can't see AMD explicitly and continually binning 8 core chiplets for the 5.1GHz boost for it to be an actual SKU. Made more sense in my mind to do a short run - it's the binning that's the limited run, not the production of the 16c/32t CPU.

 

[LePhuronn]

...a 50,000 production run is just not on.

My point was the explicit binning of 100,000 8 core chiplets to attain 5.1GHz boost is the limited run, as Darren said you'd still get 5.1GHz capable chiplets turn up, but AMD would only be binning for 4.9GHz boost for the common variety 3800X.

It's just how I see it, I don't think anybody ever said/leaked the 3850X was a limited edition. Just my crazy brain

 

[BongoHunter]

Surely the very very best chiplets to will go threadripper, just like the last 2 gens, where's all this anniversary limited edition gumf coming from?

 

[andy_mk3]

Surely the very very best chiplets to will go threadripper, just like the last 2 gens, where's all this anniversary limited edition gumf coming from?

Not always though. The best ones for threadripper aren't required to clock anywhere near as high, it's only core count that's as important. A 12c Ryzen part would only need a pair of chiplets with 6 functional cores in each that can clock well.

 

[BongoHunter]

Not always though. The best ones for threadripper aren't required to clock anywhere near as high, it's only core count that's as important. A 12c Ryzen part would only need a pair of chiplets with 6 functional cores in each that can clock well.

In previous gens the very best dies have always been cherry picked for TR - I don't see how it will be different for next gen, AMD have done very well out of TR with gaining mindshare and the HEDT niche, I don't see that changing, and AMD have confirmed Zen2 TR - so why will it be different this time round?

 

[LePhuronn]

where's all this anniversary limited edition gumf coming from?

Mostly my fevered imagination, although I'm sure I heard it somewhere which is why I've fleshed out my rough idea a few times now.

In previous gens the very best dies have always been cherry picked for TR - I don't see how it will be different for next gen, AMD have done very well out of TR with gaining mindshare and the HEDT niche, I don't see that changing, and AMD have confirmed Zen2 TR - so why will it be different this time round?

Because the nature of the chiplet design means Threadripper no longer requires the best silicon. In fact, you could argue that Threadripper this time around actually only needs the junk silicon. Indeed, the entire chiplet design muddies the waters in terms of what "the best" actually means. Consider this:

• EPYC doesn't need high clock speeds, but does need to be the most power efficient. So, the 8 and 6 core chiplets that are the least leaky are allocated to servers.
• The top SKU Ryzen 5 (8 core) doesn't need to be the most power efficient, but does need the high clock speeds. So, the 8 core chiplets that can boost to 4.8GHz become a 3600X
• The top SKU Ryzen 7 (12 core) also doesn't need great power efficiency, but again high clock speeds are a must. So the chiplets with only 6 cores, but can boost to 5GHz, are allocated to the 3700X
• The best-binned, full 8 core chiplets then move into the Ryzen 9 tier (16 cores), with the absolute godlike silicon** that has all 8 cores working and can boost to 5.1GHz become the 3850X.

These are the top SKUs for each tier, with the lesser SKUs in each populated by diminished silicon.

So then Threadripper: I doubt we'll see a 64 core SKU, so straight away that means Threadripper won't see 8x 8 core chiplets. Threadripper by its very nature has a chunky TDP, so its chiplets don't need to be power efficient. With so many cores available Threadripper is unlikely to get monstrous clocks so its chiplets don't need to reach 4.8GHz+. So what do we use?

Let's say the new flagship 3990WX is a 48c/96t CPU with 3.6GHz base and 4.4GHz boost. That is an insane chip to consider, but it could actually be comprised of "junk" chiplets that didn't make the cut for a 3700X (12c/24t 3.8GHz/4.6GHz), but is too good for a 3300X (6c/12t 3.5GHz/4.3GHz).

** the reason I theorised the 3850X as a limited edition is simply the extensive binning process required to get 8 core chiplets with a boost clock of 5.1GHz. I'm not entirely convinced it's a sustainable proposition for the long term, so the binning process to get 8 cores with a boost to 4.9GHz is the metric for the 3800X, with a short-term additional bin to find the 5.1GHz ones. As said above, it's entirely possible that AMD will still get 8 core chiplets that can boost to 5GHz and above, but that's silicon lottery territory rather than a quantified and guaranteed boost clock. Just like the 8700K and 8086K.

 

[Noxia]

Just got bios update for my MSI B450i Gaming Plus AC for (upcoming CPUS) not that I need to change.

 

[opethdisciple]

Bios analysis of latest round of firmware.

 

[CuriousTomCat]

Everyone seems convinced that final clock speeds will match last year's leak.

Assuming the demo at CES was an engineering sample, would they really know what the final clockspeeds would be as early as September last year when those leaks surfaced? Would they have had the final speeds nailed or would they be an estimate?

5.1GHz does sound like a figure for them to aim for to beat Intel.

 

[SiDeards73]

Everyone seems convinced that final clock speeds will match last year's leak.

Assuming the demo at CES was an engineering sample, would they really know what the final clockspeeds would be as early as September last year when those leaks surfaced? Would they have had the final speeds nailed or would they be an estimate?

5.1GHz does sound like a figure for them to aim for to beat Intel.

To be honest i am hopeful that the clockspeeds hit 4.7ghz for the highest models, but IPC is increased enough to make this beat a 5.2ghz 9900k... Clockspeed is kind of irrelevant if your IPC is that much better..

I would also be happy with 5ghz Clockspeeds and an IPC that puts it ahead of a 5.2ghz 9900k, again this shows AMD's IPC is better, but not much stronger than Intels.

I do think we will see more than the Zen+ 4.2/4.3ghz stuff, another 400-500hz ontop of that would probably be my guestimate, and like i say an increased IPC to make Intels clock speed advantage irrelevant.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

EPYC doesn't need high clock speeds, but does need to be the most power efficient. So, the 8 and 6 core chiplets that are the least leaky are allocated to servers.

• The top SKU Ryzen 5 (8 core) doesn't need to be the most power efficient, but does need the high clock speeds. So, the 8 core chiplets that can boost to 4.8GHz become a 3600X
• The top SKU Ryzen 7 (12 core) also doesn't need great power efficiency, but again high clock speeds are a must. So the chiplets with only 6 cores, but can boost to 5GHz, are allocated to the 3700X
• The best-binned, full 8 core chiplets then move into the Ryzen 9 Threadripper tier (16 cores), with the absolute godlike silicon** that has all 8 cores working and can boost to 5.1GHz become the 3850X Threadripper chips.

Fixed

So then Threadripper: I doubt we'll see a 64 core SKU, so straight away that means Threadripper won't see 8x 8 core chiplets. Threadripper by its very nature has a chunky TDP, so its chiplets don't need to be power efficient. With so many cores available Threadripper is unlikely to get monstrous clocks so its chiplets don't need to reach 4.8GHz+. So what do we use?

The Threadrippper 2950x is currently the highest clocked Ryzen cpu. I think it's a pretty certain that any new Threadripper series will contain the highest clocked Ryzen again.

 

[~>Dg<~]

To be honest i am hopeful that the clockspeeds hit 4.7ghz for the highest models, but IPC is increased enough to make this beat a 5.2ghz 9900k... Clockspeed is kind of irrelevant if your IPC is that much better..

I would also be happy with 5ghz Clockspeeds and an IPC that puts it ahead of a 5.2ghz 9900k, again this shows AMD's IPC is better, but not much stronger than Intels.

I do think we will see more than the Zen+ 4.2/4.3ghz stuff, another 400-500hz ontop of that would probably be my guestimate, and like i say an increased IPC to make Intels clock speed advantage irrelevant.

hope this is true but does anyone really believe we will be seeing matched ipc of intel and 5ghz amd chips ? that is such a massive leap you cant help but be sinical. im ideally hoping for 4.5ghz stable no stupid memory needed or tweaks to run that stock and matched ipc and a good price. thats realistc and would be amazing. 5ghz in normal conditions no danger volts and no heat issues or...silly memory configurations needed and i think i would eat my shoes.

 

[chroniclard]

4.5ghz boost is sort of doable at the moment with the right tweaks. These chips "should" do that all core imo with even higher boost. 5ghz not so sure about but it doesn't really need to be that high other than bragging rights.

 

[Matkinson]

Hoping it'll release sooner rather than later.

This intel 2600 is starting to struggle with fairly basic stuff now

 

[LePhuronn]

@amigafan2003

So you don't think there will even be a Ryzen 9 SKU then, and 16 cores will be purely Threadripper? I doubt that. AMD have touted their core superiority over Intel for a while, and if we get 10 core Cofee Lake Refresh Refresh then I personally don't think a "mere" 12 cores on the desktop is sufficient to assert "core superiority". Matisse can clearly do 16 cores, so do 16 cores just to press home the advantage.

As for highest clocked Ryzen, the 2950X has the highest boost, but the 2700X has the highest base. If that trend continues then perhaps yes the highest clocking silicon will go into Threadripper, with 4 8-core chiplets going into a 32 core SKU and 8 6-core chiplets going into a 48-core SKU? I would be very surprised if we see a 64-core Threadripper (gotta let EPYC Rome shine and Intel's HEDT doesn't even hit 32 cores).

 

[BongoHunter]

Having R9 at 16 core doesn't stop TR starting at 16 (or less)

With Ryzen 1 there were 8 core parts, TR started at 1900X - which was also 8 core.

 

[willhub]

Hoping it'll release sooner rather than later.

This intel 2600 is starting to struggle with fairly basic stuff now

What is your idea of "fairly basic stuff", I remember my E6600 that was lightning on Windows XP, I'm sure it'd still be fast at opening Calculator on Windows 10, unless they slow down over time?

 

[Matkinson]

Are we thinking that Threadripper might go up to 48 cores then? or stay at 32?

 

[Matkinson]

What is your idea of "fairly basic stuff", I remember my E6600 that was lightning on Windows XP, I'm sure it'd still be fast at opening Calculator on Windows 10, unless they slow down over time?

Lol, yeah fair enough, it's still pretty slick at opening Calculator.

Installing some games/software is hitting 100%.

Honestly a lot of games I play aren't maintaining 60fps (or anywhere near) due to it not being powerful enough. (granted 8gb of 1333mhz ram won't be helping)

 

[LePhuronn]

Are we thinking that Threadripper might go up to 48 cores then? or stay at 32?

I reckon there will be a lot of 6-core chiplets coming out of the wafers, so smash 8 of those puppers into Threadripper for 48c/96t goodness. Also, the chiplet approach lends itself well to increasing core counts across the entire range over the previous generation, so I don't see Threadripper getting left out of that.