• 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 (Ryzen 4000) already in the works

targets.gif

tires.gif

wooden-doors-1.gif

alienpods-1.gif

car.gif
 
Last edited:
4K8KW10 said:
I don't think that the core count will remain the same. Very likely that the top part will still be 16-core/32-thread (it actually really doesn't need at this time to go any higher)
but Ryzen 5 must be 8-core, Ryzen 7 must be 12-core and so on.
Click to expand...

marketing at x570 launch stating able to handle 16+ cores ;) edited back to 16 cores.

AMD will double that of Intel - part due to chip design and part marketing campaign. Intel set for 10 core and 8 core Back port later on, even on 14nm this will be quick as shown by 2nd gen 10nm laptops dropping core counts and gaining single and multicore performance all with less watts .

Factor in 7nm non EUV node should be freed up from 7nm EUV as well as samsung being able to produce you'd be looking at the IO chip being 7nm as well . think we'd see Ryzen 9 flagship being 20/24 core/ 40/48 thread Unit . Still under or equal to the 24 count of 3rd Gen Threadripper but with IPC gains and lack of extra PCIe 4 they have . If 3950x speed was stated 4.7- gunning for next flagship to be 4.9ghz
 
It could be quite possible AMD won't increase core counts with the immediate Zen2 replacement in 2020,but further increase IPC and clockspeeds,ie,like what happened with the move from 14NM to 12NM. I would imagine them waiting until 5NM to double core count on desktop consumer CPUs. Also from what I gather EUV nodes have worse yields,so I would imagine it makes more sense to use those for the server designs.
 
The need to wait for the software to catch up. A 16-core/32-thread CPUs will be plenty for the next several years.
They need to up the base, because most people stay with up to 6 cores max in the best case.
 
DragonQ said:
The problem with focusing on clock speeds is that even if you manage to get great clocks on a given node, you can't stay on it forever (no matter what Intel thinks) and there's never a guarantee that the next node will be anywhere near as good. For this reason, plus power/heat advantages, IPC is far more important.
Click to expand...

Agree with that! The marketing hype usually leads you to believe that higher clock speeds are the be all and end all but IPC is more important imo. Zen2 seems to be performing on par with intel in single threaded tasks whilst having much lower clock speeds
 
alec said:
Fascinating read. Is there something inherent about FEM that it has to be done on multicore CPU rather than GPU?
Click to expand...

If the CPUs stay mostly lightly loaded, you need their free execution capabilities to use them together with the GPU!

Well, intel is going to have deep troubles soon (very strange why it always gives the error: "ERROR: voting is blocked...") :confused:

AMD Ryzen 4000 ‘Renoir’ 8 Core, Ryzen 7 4700U APU Leaks Out – 7nm Zen 2 Cores With Up To 4.2 GHz at 15W
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-4700u-apu-8-core-ryzen-4000-3dmark-specs-performance-leak/

AMD-Ryzen-4000-APU-Ryzen-7-4700-U-8-Core-3-DMark-Performance-Leak.png
 
Praz94 said:
8 core parts at 15w?

As far as I’m aware they’re usually much higher TDP than 15w
Click to expand...

Ay those are 35 watt parts.

4K8KW10 said:
Because it isn't 4-core, to begin with :D It's 8-core without SMT.

Ryzen-mobile-8-core.png
Click to expand...

With a 2Ghz base clock 15 Watts on good silicon is possible, my cores are bottom of the barrel silicon using about 8 Watts per core at 4.1 to 4.2Ghz each, don't forget like everything AMD do these days the silicon is pushed to the limits out of the box, if these are Threadripper or even EPYC class silicon 2Ghz 8 cores / 4.2Ghz 1 core is easily doable.
Threadripper cores per core TDP is at 4.6Ghz what mine are at 4.2Ghz.
 
humbug said:
Ay those are 35 watt parts.

With a 2Ghz base clock 15 Watts on good silicon is possible, my cores are bottom of the barrel silicon using about 8 Watts per core at 4.1 to 4.2Ghz each, don't forget like everything AMD do these days the silicon is pushed to the limits out of the box, if these are Threadripper or even EPYC class silicon 2Ghz 8 cores / 4.2Ghz 1 core is easily doable.
Threadripper cores per core TDP is at 4.6Ghz what mine are at 4.2Ghz.
Click to expand...

Well, this is an increase in single-core turbo boost clocks of 200 MHz, the Ryzen 7 3700U already has 4.0 GHz max boost clock. https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-7-3700u
And its base clock is 2.3 GHz.

Probably Zen 3 will offer +200,+300 MHz max boost clocks on the desktop parts, as well.
 
Praz94 said:
8 core parts at 15w?

As far as I’m aware they’re usually much higher TDP than 15w
Click to expand...

no way 8 cores lol maybe 2 or pushing 4 cores none higher. 8 cores 4.8ghz requires far more than 15w at 14nm. Most of Intels laptops chips that can do those clocks with 8 cores have 90w TDP which is why when you play games on them they overheat and then down click so they can't actually hold 4.8ghz anyway - probably closer to 4ghz all core under load due to lack of cooling
 
Praz94 said:
8 core parts at 15w?

As far as I’m aware they’re usually much higher TDP than 15w
Click to expand...

One core can boost to 4.8 GHz, while the others will be staying at much lower clocks.
You can't put chips with higher than 15W TDP in thin-form-factor ultrabooks, notebooks, where these chips are headed to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom