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

Status
Not open for further replies.
alec said:
too much conspiracy
AMD is harvesting chips where more than 2 cores are not functional. Depending on which ones are disabled, you end up with 1 or 2 CCX setup 4 core CPUs. Alternatively when cache takes a hit in one CCX, you ae left with another.
Click to expand...

Agree they found a very nice way to steal an entire market segment using stuff that was otherwise 'damaged'
Great work
 
LePhuronn said:
No, 3100 is a pair of chiplets (CCDs) with 6 cores disabled on each, leaving only half a CCX.
Click to expand...
I might have my CCX and CCD confused. But 3100 I thought was formed from a pair of half CCX into a CCD. Each CCX is 4 core 8T but half Of the CCX disables. Where 3300 is a full CCX forming a single CCD. IF doesn’t really matter to 3300 as it is just formed from a single piece of silicon.

anyway, is there a way to enable the disabled cores in 3100 :D. I mean even if they are bad cores getting 8C16T CPU for like £100 is awesome value.

also on the same point, can AMD not implement some software function in Ryzen Master that force games to load off a full single CCX with the best core thus improve gaming performance significantly on all the Ryzen 5, 7, 9??
 
LePhuronn said:
No, 3100 is a pair of chiplets (CCDs) with 6 cores disabled on each, leaving only half a CCX. 3300X is a single chiplet with 4 cores disabled, leaving 1 fully intact CCX. Both CPUs still have to bounce through the IO die over Infinity Fabric, but the 3100 has to also bounce across the Infinity Fabric for the 4 cores to talk to each other. 3300X has no such restriction because all 4 cores are on the same piece of silicon and within the same CCX. It's this particular detail that is so exciting for what Zen 3 can bring with no CCX latency.
Click to expand...
I wonder if this will make the 6 and 8 core zen 3 parts better gaming options over the 12/16 since they will be a single CCX.
 
Destination said:
Agree they found a very nice way to steal an entire market segment using stuff that was otherwise 'damaged'
Great work
Click to expand...

Considering the 94% yield numbers, I believe they might be crippling some good chips these days. However with $13 per chiplet (just the silicon wafer cost) they can afford to do crazy things. :D

Contrary to some others who make barely 27 chips on the same wafer & process :rolleyes:
 
pc-guy said:
I might have my CCX and CCD confused. But 3100 I thought was formed from a pair of half CCX into a CCD. Each CCX is 4 core 8T but half Of the CCX disables. Where 3300 is a full CCX forming a single CCD. IF doesn’t really matter to 3300 as it is just formed from a single piece of silicon.
Click to expand...
No, you're not getting CCX and CCD confused and are correct in what you say. I got it wrong, I thought the 3100 was 2 chiplets, it's not. It's 1 chiplet with each CCX chopped in half (which is what you said).

The upshot being 3100 has inter-CCX latency, the 3300X doesn't.
 
Participant said:
I'm thinking this too. I wonder if AMD use this to segment the 4700 vs. the 4700X (assuming the 4600 doesn't become an 8-core part).
Click to expand...

We didn't had 3700(non-X) and we won't have 4700.
Neither AMD is going to put 2 CCD (chiplet) with 4 cores removed on each to make a new CPU. Is worthless and expensive effort. It would rather make quad cores or hexacore out of a single CCD.
 
Doobedoo said:
No point for us but someone may bite. Perhaps It's a response for the new Intel chips although the price reduction on the 3900x makes It quite attractive.
Click to expand...

There is no point for this chips to exist over reducing prices if they are made on N7 and not N7P.
If they are made on N7P as some rumours state, then a 8-10% clock increase on same power consumption, will kill in gaming the Intel 10th series.
Which is already very marginal ahead in gaming with almost double the power. Even the 10600K needs +110W to overclock to 5Ghz. Thats as much as my 3900X consumes, which is boosting to 4600-4625 area.
 
Again no point If you're already have Zen 2 It would be smarter just to wait for Zen 3.

But someone will buy just not me or you. Perhaps It was part of their plan to stop B450 owners upgrading to Zen 3 It may well of enticed them. Who knows.
 
Last edited:
RavenXXX2 said:
Don't think a clock speed bump is going to catch Intel fps, that 5ghz 3800x certainly didn't.
Click to expand...
It doesn't need to match them In out right performance It just has to be a better all around product at a better price, efficiency ect. Zen 3 will do that.

It does keep Amd's name out there though to take a bit more shine off Intel's latest and greatest.
 
Doobedoo said:
It doesn't need to match them In out right performance It just has to be a better all around product at a better price, efficiency ect. Zen 3 will do that.

It does keep Amd's name out there though to take a bit more shine off Intel's latest and greatest.
Click to expand...

You forget that there are a lot of people who think the AMD product line is worthless until it can beat Intel offerings in absolutely everything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom