AMD Zen 3 (5000 Series), rumored 17% IPC gain.

[humbug]

I don't think Zen3 is supposed to solve latency issues. Improve a bit maybe, with new IO die, more unified L3, possibly higher IF clock speed limit. But issues will remain, inherent to chiplet design

Its not "The Chiplet design" The Ryzen APU's are a single die with the IMC on die, they are no better for gaming than a 3700X, in fact not as good because they only have 8MB L3 vs 32MB on the 3700X.

Now that AMD have all 3 designs on the market (Multi chip multi CCX - Multi chip single CCX - Single Chip multi CCX) we know what it is.

Its intercore CCX latency, the 3300X is chiplet, it has a separate IO die with the IMC on it, it also has a single 4 core 8 thread CCX.

In this slide i highlighted the 3300X, this was for another time of using it, notice the 4.4Ghz 3100X, its the same 4 cores 8 threads with the same 16MB L3 Cache as the 3300X, the same CPU, the difference is the 3100X is a dual CCX design like the 3600 - 3700X..............

So at 4.4Ghz is scores 210 FPS, the 4.4Ghz 3300X scores 240 FPS, that's +15%, the Intel equivalent is the 7700K, 4 cores 8 threads the same as the 3300X, its also the same architecture as 8000, 9000 and 10000 series Intel CPU's, they are the same CPU with more cores tagged on.

So the 3300X at 4.4Ghz scores 240 FPS, the 7700K at 5.1Ghz 244 FPS, +2%, the 7700K is clocked 16% higher, so in Gaming IPC terms the 3300X with its single 4 core 8 thread CCX is 15% faster than the multi CCX Zen 2 and 14% faster than Intel.

Zen 3 will be single CCX 8 core 16 thread Chiplets, effectively 9900K's, so a 4.5Ghz 4700X would match a 5.1Ghz 9900K in gaming, that's assuming there is 0 IPC gain Zen 3 vs Zen 2.

 

[alec]

Yes yes 3300X is better than 3100 for gaming, but not all of it is due to latency.
Unified cache (intercore latency, yes, but also better cache locality, data doesn't need to be copied twice) and more L3 cache per core. Games love both. Both will improve in Zen3.
But relatively higher memory access latency will remain. And that means that some sensitive tasks may still be faster on Intel, although on paper Zen3 should be better.

 

[Joxeon]

[

Yes yes 3300X is better than 3100 for gaming, but not all of it is due to latency.
Unified cache (intercore latency, yes, but also better cache locality, data doesn't need to be copied twice) and more L3 cache per core. Games love both. Both will improve in Zen3.
But relatively higher memory access latency will remain. And that means that some sensitive tasks may still be faster on Intel, although on paper Zen3 should be better.

I'm sure userbenchmark will have to come up with something new to keep Intel ahead again.

 

[humbug]

Yes yes 3300X is better than 3100 for gaming, but not all of it is due to latency.
Unified cache (intercore latency, yes, but also better cache locality, data doesn't need to be copied twice) and more L3 cache per core. Games love both. Both will improve in Zen3.
But relatively higher memory access latency will remain. And that means that some sensitive tasks may still be faster on Intel, although on paper Zen3 should be better.

Where the Memory Controller sits doesn't matter, the 3300X still looks like this....

It just has one side of the CCX chiplet active, hence 16MB L3 vs 32MB on my 3600 which takes 3 cores from each CCX or 2+4.... there are 4 cores in each CCX with 16MB L3 allocated to each side.

Zen 3 will also look like this, but the core chiplet that you see will be a single 8 core 16 thread 32MB chip, no CCX in there.

 

[clv101]

Is the expectation that we'll see zen 3 chips in the same configuration as the current zen 2 range? 4 core, 6 core, 8 core etc... With a few different clock speeds?

So the current Ryzen 5 3600 gets a 4600 replacement etc?

 

[humbug]

Is the expectation that we'll see zen 3 chips in the same configuration as the current zen 2 range? 4 core, 6 core, 8 core etc... With a few different clock speeds?

So the current Ryzen 5 3600 gets a 4600 replacement etc?

Yes.

 

[LePhuronn]

Is the expectation that we'll see zen 3 chips in the same configuration as the current zen 2 range? 4 core, 6 core, 8 core etc... With a few different clock speeds?

So the current Ryzen 5 3600 gets a 4600 replacement etc?

Pretty much. Zen 3 was never rumoured to increase core counts (AMD chose to focus on refining the chiplet concept), and based on AMD presentations about EPYC Milan's core counts, I think it's safe to say we know Zen 3 isn't changing core counts at an architectural level.

Whether AMD change the SKUs remains to be seen. It's entirely possible AMD could push the 4600 to 8 cores with a pair of 4-core chiplets, and have the 4700 as the single-chiplet 8 core (take a look at 3100 and 3300 for how that could work performance-wise). That's just spitballing possibilities, I don't see it happening tbh.

 

[Journey]

Is the expectation that we'll see zen 3 chips in the same configuration as the current zen 2 range? 4 core, 6 core, 8 core etc... With a few different clock speeds?

So the current Ryzen 5 3600 gets a 4600 replacement etc?

They might shuffle the stack down if they really want to bury Intel as an option. 6c/12t being the entry point, 8c/16t with two SKU's again, one with two CCD's, the other a tighter more focused part with one CCD and better performance, then 12c and 16c core options for heavier multi tasking.

 

[Vince]

Pretty much. Zen 3 was never rumoured to increase core counts (AMD chose to focus on refining the chiplet concept), and based on AMD presentations about EPYC Milan's core counts, I think it's safe to say we know Zen 3 isn't changing core counts at an architectural level.

Whether AMD change the SKUs remains to be seen. It's entirely possible AMD could push the 4600 to 8 cores with a pair of 4-core chiplets, and have the 4700 as the single-chiplet 8 core (take a look at 3100 and 3300 for how that could work performance-wise). That's just spitballing possibilities, I don't see it happening tbh.

At this point everything they touch turns to gold. It doesn't matter what they do people gonna snap it up!

 

[clv101]

And what's likely to happen to the existing zen 2 range? Does it drop out of manufacture straight away (already?) or does it carry on alongside the new zen 3 for many months?

Price wise, does zen 3 replace zen 2 with the older chips getting apa cut? Or do zen 2 hold station with zen 3 coming in higher price points?

I guess no one knows the future, but what has tended to happen before?

 

[LePhuronn]

So far we've seen the previous generation hang around for a while with some chunky price cuts. However, I'm expecting prices to shift up slightly from what they are now because AMD are in a much more commanding position in the market. I think the recent release of the 3000 XT refreshes is in part a way of acclimatising the market to a price hike. Expect Zen 3 to come in slightly higher than the 3000 XT prices (because they will be noticeably better CPUs), the XT line to drop in price a little bit and the non XTs to drop a little bit more. 6 months in is when we'll see the 3000 series take some proper price drops.

 

[humbug]

And what's likely to happen to the existing zen 2 range? Does it drop out of manufacture straight away (already?) or does it carry on alongside the new zen 3 for many months?

Price wise, does zen 3 replace zen 2 with the older chips getting apa cut? Or do zen 2 hold station with zen 3 coming in higher price points?

I guess no one knows the future, but what has tended to happen before?

Like they did with the 2600 the 3600 will probably become the Sub £100 budget CPU with the rest simply left to go out of stock.

Right now AMD are unable to keep up with OEM demands for Ryzen 4000 APU's, all Zen 2 production (Other than the 3600) will probably switch to Renoir to fill those OEM orders. It wouldn't surprise me if they have already slowed Ryzen 3000 production to a trickle...

AMD Facing Acute Shortage of 7nm Ryzen 4000 Mobile Processors

https://www.hardwaretimes.com/amd-facing-acute-shortage-of-7nm-ryzen-4000-mobile-processors/

 

[Deleted member 209350]

if zen3 is going to have 8 core chiplets, does that mean that for example a 12 core processor will just have 2 8 core chiplets with 4 cores disabled?

 

[Joxeon]

if zen3 is going to have 8 core chiplets, does that mean that for example a 12 core processor will just have 2 8 core chiplets with 4 cores disabled?

Would most likely have 2 cores disabled on each chiplet.

 

[LePhuronn]

if zen3 is going to have 8 core chiplets, does that mean that for example a 12 core processor will just have 2 8 core chiplets with 4 cores disabled?

Zen 2 has 8 core chiplets, and the 3900X is 2 chiplets with 2 cores disabled on each. A 12 core Zen 3 will be exactly the same; 2 chiplets with 2 cores disabled on each.

But again, it's how the cores are arranged which is the big difference in Zen 3: the chiplet has a single 8 core CCX, rather than the pair of 4 core CCXs used on Zen 2.

 

[Stu]

Its not "The Chiplet design" The Ryzen APU's are a single die with the IMC on die, they are no better for gaming than a 3700X, in fact not as good because they only have 8MB L3 vs 32MB on the 3700X.

Now that AMD have all 3 designs on the market (Multi chip multi CCX - Multi chip single CCX - Single Chip multi CCX) we know what it is.

Its intercore CCX latency, the 3300X is chiplet, it has a separate IO die with the IMC on it, it also has a single 4 core 8 thread CCX.

In this slide i highlighted the 3300X, this was for another time of using it, notice the 4.4Ghz 3100X, its the same 4 cores 8 threads with the same 16MB L3 Cache as the 3300X, the same CPU, the difference is the 3100X is a dual CCX design like the 3600 - 3700X..............

So at 4.4Ghz is scores 210 FPS, the 4.4Ghz 3300X scores 240 FPS, that's +15%, the Intel equivalent is the 7700K, 4 cores 8 threads the same as the 3300X, its also the same architecture as 8000, 9000 and 10000 series Intel CPU's, they are the same CPU with more cores tagged on.

So the 3300X at 4.4Ghz scores 240 FPS, the 7700K at 5.1Ghz 244 FPS, +2%, the 7700K is clocked 16% higher, so in Gaming IPC terms the 3300X with its single 4 core 8 thread CCX is 15% faster than the multi CCX Zen 2 and 14% faster than Intel.

Zen 3 will be single CCX 8 core 16 thread Chiplets, effectively 9900K's, so a 4.5Ghz 4700X would match a 5.1Ghz 9900K in gaming, that's assuming there is 0 IPC gain Zen 3 vs Zen 2.

Does this mean the 8 core Zen 3 model is the sweet spot for gamers?

So far we've seen the previous generation hang around for a while with some chunky price cuts. However, I'm expecting prices to shift up slightly from what they are now because AMD are in a much more commanding position in the market. I think the recent release of the 3000 XT refreshes is in part a way of acclimatising the market to a price hike. Expect Zen 3 to come in slightly higher than the 3000 XT prices (because they will be noticeably better CPUs), the XT line to drop in price a little bit and the non XTs to drop a little bit more. 6 months in is when we'll see the 3000 series take some proper price drops.

Didn't the XT models launch at the same price as the existing X models (and the X models dropped in price)? I'm not sure about pricing of 3000 series at launch compared to 2000 series, but a quick google shows the following launch prices:

2600 - $199
2600X - $229
2700X - $329

3600 - $199
3600X - $249
3700X - $329

However, is this a fair comparison? Should it be:

2600 - $199 ---> 3600 - $199
2600X - $229 ---> 3600X - $249
2700 - $299 ---> 3700X - $329
2700X - $329 ---> 3800X - $399

0 - 21% price increase.

 

[Deleted member 209350]

Zen 2 has 8 core chiplets, and the 3900X is 2 chiplets with 2 cores disabled on each. A 12 core Zen 3 will be exactly the same; 2 chiplets with 2 cores disabled on each.

But again, it's how the cores are arranged which is the big difference in Zen 3: the chiplet has a single 8 core CCX, rather than the pair of 4 core CCXs used on Zen 2.

Sorry I meant to say the CCX die not chiplet!

so a 6 core part, will just be 1 ccx die with 2 cores disabled correct?

 

[LePhuronn]

Sorry I meant to say the CCX die not chiplet!

so a 6 core part, will just be 1 ccx die with 2 cores disabled correct?

Yup. Forgive me if I sound patronising, but let's just confirm terminology so we don't get our wires crossed CCX is a bunch of cores, CCD is the chiplet, the CCD is made up of CCXs, cache and stuff.

So yes you're correct. A 6 core Zen 3 part will have 1 chiplet with 1 CCX that has 2 cores disabled. 2 chiplets will give you a 12 core part.

 

[humbug]

Does this mean the 8 core Zen 3 model is the sweet spot for gamers?

This is a good question, frankly i don't know, we do know having a single CCX / CCD increases gaming performance by 15%, one would assume that if you split them into CCD's then you're reintroducing that Intercore latency that you lost by making the Chiplet a single CCX.

Zen 2 does keep the workload inside a single CCX as much as it can, it physically over-rides Microsoft's idiotic Thread scheduling so in old low threaded DX9 games Zen 2 does really well, they behave much like the 3300X.

So i guess it is possible if they always have one CCD with 8 cores they can keep the thread workloads inside a single CCD, the 8 core one, where games use more than 16 threads i don't know, but those are rare.

 

[BluesFanUK]

Is there a reason there's no 10 core from AMD?