• 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.

Ryzen "2" ?

AndreiD said:
Might be a niche SKU with more cache, I'm curious what's the die config for it, 6+4 or 3+3+2+2/4+2+2+2 or maybe some weird 4+4+2? Can't see them using more than 2 dies for a lower priced SKU though, so I think 6+4 is the most likely config.
Click to expand...
Why not 5+5? They use 3+3 for 6 core chips.

Regardless, I just cannot fathom how they would increase CCX density without it being a 7nm chip and those will certainly not be production ready by the time the 9th generation Intel chips are released.
 
The chip makes some kind of sense. There is no way AMD can compete with 9900k with rumours of 5.3ghz overclock a ryzen 2700x just cant compete with that. Before AMD was using 2 extra cores to entice customer to buy 2700x over the 8700K so they have to provide those two extra cores again. But who is going to buy that?

we want more speed not more cores, if I want more cores I would just buy the Threadripper line. Its obvious they cant give us more speed and their IPC is roughly equivalent to Intel's.

can only dream of a ryzen at 5.0ghz:(
 
The idea that this could be a 9900k response is tempting but I think it's BS. They only have a 4 core ccx right? It wouldn't seem economic to change that before Zen 2 or 7nm. So it would have to be an entirely new 3 ccx die, which would be 12 cores not 10.
 
Last edited:
Pants said:
The idea that this could be a 9900k response is tempting but I think it's BS. They only have a 4 core ccx right? It wouldn't seem economic to change that before Zen 2 or 7nm. So it would have to be an entirely new 3 ccx die, which would be 12 cores not 10.
Click to expand...

There have been rumours that future ryzen would use 6 core CCXs for a while. This could be two of those with a core disabled on each, for better yields and / or a future 12 core trump card.
 
Last edited:
pandem0nium said:
There have been rumours that future ryzen would use 6 core CCXs for a while. This could be two of those with a core disabled on each, for better yields and / or a future 12 core trump card.
Click to expand...

https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-rome-details-trickle-out-64-cores-128-threads-per-socket/

Those rumours have been pretty much confirmed now, AMD have detailed the 64 core 128 thread EPYC replacement for the 32 core that is now the Threadripper 2990WX.

It consist of 4X 16 cores dies.
 
Also no CPU cooler for the X models, seems like a misguided release, but maybe they'll adjust pricing a little once they're on the market to make them more attractive.
 
Not too shure what to make of this, but any others running a 2700x your comments would be welcome.
My rig is as in my sig, but have been running Level 4 PE for a few months now so i normally get a 4.25Ghz all core clock on a cold boot. Sometimes that might be 4.23Gz if the ambient temp is a bit higher.
This morning when i booted up, the all core clock had jumped to 4.28Gz and when i re-booted after lunch it jumped to 4.3ghz. It was no cooler in the room the rig is in than it was this morning (got no heating on).
It's got me stumped. After running an hour of Realbench this afternoon and then re-booting, the all core clock dropped back down to 4.23Gz. This is of course with PBO enabled and using the Windows balanced power plan.
My only thought on the cause is because of the cooler weather at the moment.....................................any other thoughts ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom