Support NeoGAF

[TheMikado]

“
Before closing out this piece I would be remiss if I did not mention one of the most eye-brow raising rumors that we’ve come across and it’s this. AMD is allegedly going to be raising the bar once again next year by pushing the mainstream core count from 8 cores to a maximum of 12 to 16 cores on the AM4 socket.

The rumor out there is that we’re looking at 16 core Ryzen 7 chips as the new norm in 2019. However, according to private conversations we’ve had with incredibly knowledgeable people in the industry the actual core count figure might be closer to 12 cores. With that being said, anyway you slice it that’s still a LOT of cores. An unprecedented number of cores for a mainstream consumer-class socket in fact.

As with all rumors though, please remember to take this with a grain of salt.”

https://wccftech.com/rumor-amd-brin...roadmap-into-2020-detailed-zen-2-zen-3-zen-5/

The ramifications of having 12c/24t or 16c/32t in consumer grade high end CPUs is crazy. I’d have thought you have diminishing returns beyond 8c/16t for consumers but I guess we won’t actuall know until it becomes mainstream. If this is true and X2 and PS5 are based on Ryzen 7 Zen 2 we could have our baseline in terms of gaming shoot way up. I’m not sold on it yet, but given that we going from 14nm to 7nm I guess they had more die space to theoretically double the core count in the same socket.

The other rumor is that Ryzen 3000 is supposed to be able to hit 5Ghz.
I'm not that optimistic, but I am at least hoping for boosts beyond 4.2-4.5 and minimum 3.8 base clock.

https://segmentnext.com/2018/03/07/amd-ryzen-3000-series-cpus/

"AMD Ryzen 2000 series is around the corner and we have been getting some leaks regarding the upcoming lineup. You can check out details regarding that here. We also got some leaks concerning the 2700X as well as the 2600 which feature the same number of cores and threads but higher clock speeds. Now we are getting word that the AMD Ryzen 3000 series will hit 5 GHz using the 7nm process.
The first generation AMD Ryzen die was 213 mm² large and according to expectations, AMD Ryzen 3000 series die will be 100 mm². This will reduce the cost of production and will also provide the potential of increased core and thread count, which is something where AMD has the edge. A 5 GHz clock speed translates into 40% better performance which is very realistic and doable.
While this is something to keep an eye out for, you need to know that the AMD Ryzen 3000 series will not be coming out before early 2019. These are expected numbers so take this information with a grain of salt. AMD has delivered more than the expected performance in the past, at least when it comes to CPUs. Keeping that in mind it is possible that the upcoming AMD Ryzen 3000 series CPUs could provide better performance than just 40%."

https://www.techpowerup.com/242148/globalfoundries-7-nm-to-enable-up-to-2-7x-smaller-dies-5-ghz-cpus
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1243...h-dr-gary-patton-cto-of-globalfoundries#three

I added this last bit to the original post to address the complaints about clockspeed.

 

[IbizaPocholo]

“

Tell a mod to move this post to gaming discussion.

 

[aa_Pregnant_Nun]

hope its true tbh but sounds expensive even though its amd. good to see amd really giving intel a run for their money lol.

on top of this I heard amd is also working on ddr5 ram support too

 

[Hiro_Kunimi_80]

well
Ryzen ThreadRipper is already a consumer grade product ( Duct tape to stick 2 x8 core cpu together, included of course )

 

[LOLCats]

Its wccftech. Clickbait site. I mean ya we’ll get more cores later but they dont know shit (except how to get clicks).

 

[Kenpachii]

well
Ryzen ThreadRipper is already a consumer grade product ( Duct tape to stick 2 x8 core cpu together, included of course )

Yea and they also realized how bad of a idea that was.

They need higher clocks. I wish they would move more towards 6ghz rather then more cores.

 

[Memorabilia]

Yea and they also realized how bad of a idea that was.

They need higher clocks. I wish they would move more towards 6ghz rather then more cores.

This echoes my initial thought...what does higher core count mean for clock rates? Can 7nm allow for an increase in both?

 

[Kenpachii]

This echoes my initial thought...what does higher core count mean for clock rates? Can 7nm allow for an increase in both?

Higher core count = lower clocks speeds.

You can increase both with 7nm, but will it make sense for anybody on the PC front to upgrade? If the gain in games will be only minimal? don't think so.

However AMD is more a console CPU provider atm. So 7nm ryzen will be builded for consoles and not PC ( mindset ). I could see next consoles get 12-16 cores at low clocks for next generation. however i can also see them opt for a higher clock speed and stick with 8 cores specially if they are more interested in providing 60 fps solutions. But i highly doubt that because next gen they will have to do a push for 4k and those consoles will be heavily GPU limited to start with.

Also i am not sure how efficient those ryzen cpu's are at higher clocks, it could very well be that increase are simple not possible on the mhz side without massive yield issue's. Who knows.

 

[TheMikado]

Its wccftech. Clickbait site. I mean ya we’ll get more cores later but they dont know shit (except how to get clicks).

This has actually be reported by other new outlets for months now. This isn't exactly a new rumor.
https://segmentnext.com/2018/03/07/amd-ryzen-3000-series-cpus/

 

[TheMikado]

hope its true tbh but sounds expensive even though its amd. good to see amd really giving intel a run for their money lol.

on top of this I heard amd is also working on ddr5 ram support too

Not necessarily because it should allow for cheaper binned CPUs In theory it should allow the low end processors to be a minimum of 8 cores. Whether they go that route is another then entirely. But having an 8 core base line for both gaming systems and PC gaming isnt a bad thing IMO.

 

[TheMikado]

Yea and they also realized how bad of a idea that was.

This echoes my initial thought...what does higher core count mean for clock rates? Can 7nm allow for an increase in both?

Higher core count = lower clocks speeds.

You can increase both with 7nm, but will it make sense for anybody on the PC front to upgrade? If the gain in games will be only minimal? don't think so.

However AMD is more a console CPU provider atm. So 7nm ryzen will be builded for consoles and not PC ( mindset ). I could see next consoles get 12-16 cores at low clocks for next generation. however i can also see them opt for a higher clock speed and stick with 8 cores specially if they are more interested in providing 60 fps solutions. But i highly doubt that because next gen they will have to do a push for 4k and those consoles will be heavily GPU limited to start with.

Also i am not sure how efficient those ryzen cpu's are at higher clocks, it could very well be that increase are simple not possible on the mhz side without massive yield issue's. Who knows.

They need higher clocks. I wish they would move more towards 6ghz rather then more cores.

The other rumor is that Ryzen 3000 is supposed to be able to hit 5Ghz.
I'm not that optimistic, but I am at least hoping for boosts beyond 4.2-4.5 and minimum 3.8 base clock.

https://segmentnext.com/2018/03/07/amd-ryzen-3000-series-cpus/

"AMD Ryzen 2000 series is around the corner and we have been getting some leaks regarding the upcoming lineup. You can check out details regarding that here. We also got some leaks concerning the 2700X as well as the 2600 which feature the same number of cores and threads but higher clock speeds. Now we are getting word that the AMD Ryzen 3000 series will hit 5 GHz using the 7nm process.
The first generation AMD Ryzen die was 213 mm² large and according to expectations, AMD Ryzen 3000 series die will be 100 mm². This will reduce the cost of production and will also provide the potential of increased core and thread count, which is something where AMD has the edge. A 5 GHz clock speed translates into 40% better performance which is very realistic and doable.
While this is something to keep an eye out for, you need to know that the AMD Ryzen 3000 series will not be coming out before early 2019. These are expected numbers so take this information with a grain of salt. AMD has delivered more than the expected performance in the past, at least when it comes to CPUs. Keeping that in mind it is possible that the upcoming AMD Ryzen 3000 series CPUs could provide better performance than just 40%."

https://www.techpowerup.com/242148/globalfoundries-7-nm-to-enable-up-to-2-7x-smaller-dies-5-ghz-cpus
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1243...h-dr-gary-patton-cto-of-globalfoundries#three

 

[GoldenEye98]

Doubtful we see more than an 8 core cpu in next gen consoles.

 

[Chozofication_]

Good upgrade option for heavy content creators not on the x99 platform if true.

Of course for games I'm hoping for 4.5 GHz base clock or something with boosts to 5, and IPC improvements. Zen 2 will rock Intel's world I think, and that's not just blind optimism.

 

[TheMikado]

Good upgrade option for heavy content creators not on the x99 platform if true.

Of course for games I'm hoping for 4.5 GHz base clock or something with boosts to 5, and IPC improvements. Zen 2 will rock Intel's world I think, and that's not just blind optimism.

They are claiming a possible frequency increase of 40% or more meaning their 3.6Ghz processors could be 5Ghz on Zen 2. I think that’s absolute madness for a single generation. Especially when they translates into boosts close to 6Ghz and 40% increase is supposed to be the minimum! It’s crazy, it’s terrifying. I’m trying to keep my optimism down but when they are talking about these kinds of gains as minimum you can’t help but get it excited about the processor space in the next couple of years.

 

[Silver Wattle]

Current CCX is 4 cores, Zen 2 CCX will be 6 cores.
Current X700 series chips have two CCX, I see this staying the same for the next series, meaning we will see 12 cores instead of 8.

 

[Shin]

Too many cores, I'd personally like to see the speed per core go up to be honest.

 

[Hiro_Kunimi_80]

Yea and they also realized how bad of a idea that was.
.

well considering how fast is a threadripper system as workstation powerhouse, I hope they will have more of these bad idea ( and I'm a Intel cpu user )

They need higher clocks. I wish they would move more towards 6ghz rather then more cores.

higher clock rate it's not the problem of Threadripper or any others multicore cpu, it's the poor software optimisation that doesn't scale well with complex multicore cpu system

unless things changes real quick on such specific aspect, the most efficient core design will win as performance level.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Too many cores, I'd personally like to see the speed per core go up to be honest.

I fear this ship has sailed, I would not be surprised for either part of the per core performance to go down at worst or to absorb some of the manufacturing process improvements over time at best to allow even more cores. As the number of cores go up, the x86 decoding / core front end cost represents a bigger and bigger portion of the cost.

 

[TheMikado]

Current CCX is 4 cores, Zen 2 CCX will be 6 cores.
Current X700 series chips have two CCX, I see this staying the same for the next series, meaning we will see 12 cores instead of 8.

Why would it be 6 vs 8?
I’d imagine they would all be 8core but binned accordingly for yields. It’s a practice they already do now.

 

[TheMikado]

I updated to OP to include the rumors about 5Ghz clock speeds as well.

 

[Kenpachii]

The other rumor is that Ryzen 3000 is supposed to be able to hit 5Ghz.
I'm not that optimistic, but I am at least hoping for boosts beyond 4.2-4.5 and minimum 3.8 base clock.

https://segmentnext.com/2018/03/07/amd-ryzen-3000-series-cpus/

"AMD Ryzen 2000 series is around the corner and we have been getting some leaks regarding the upcoming lineup. You can check out details regarding that here. We also got some leaks concerning the 2700X as well as the 2600 which feature the same number of cores and threads but higher clock speeds. Now we are getting word that the AMD Ryzen 3000 series will hit 5 GHz using the 7nm process.
The first generation AMD Ryzen die was 213 mm² large and according to expectations, AMD Ryzen 3000 series die will be 100 mm². This will reduce the cost of production and will also provide the potential of increased core and thread count, which is something where AMD has the edge. A 5 GHz clock speed translates into 40% better performance which is very realistic and doable.
While this is something to keep an eye out for, you need to know that the AMD Ryzen 3000 series will not be coming out before early 2019. These are expected numbers so take this information with a grain of salt. AMD has delivered more than the expected performance in the past, at least when it comes to CPUs. Keeping that in mind it is possible that the upcoming AMD Ryzen 3000 series CPUs could provide better performance than just 40%."

https://www.techpowerup.com/242148/globalfoundries-7-nm-to-enable-up-to-2-7x-smaller-dies-5-ghz-cpus
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1243...h-dr-gary-patton-cto-of-globalfoundries#three

Interesting, maybe they will keep pushing then. Somehow i got the feeling tho that 5ghz isn't going to happen or those cpu's are going to cost a fortune. As they are just specially binned.

well considering how fast is a threadripper system as workstation powerhouse, I hope they will have more of these bad idea ( and I'm a Intel cpu user )



higher clock rate it's not the problem of Threadripper or any others multicore cpu, it's the poor software optimisation that doesn't scale well with complex multicore cpu system

unless things changes real quick on such specific aspect, the most efficient core design will win as performance level.

Obviously i am talking about gaming here and not work station related stuff. If i would care for work station solutions that use tons of CPU cores i would not even opt for threadripper to start with.

Thread ripper is like having multiple gpu's. People that have it hate it, people that don't have it want it and when they do next gen they will drop it for a faster single gpu again. Why? because it simple isn't working in most games and won't be working well even in future titles which makes half of those cores being utterly and completely useless.

There is nothing more fun when seeing a CPU limit and then your CPU displays 10%usage. But but optimization, no not really. you just bought a dud of a CPU for the tasks you are throwing at it. Because in reality of things devs see only 0.000001% of there audience having a threadripper or a 16 core cpu and simple put resources in something else. But even if the market shifts will it be the focus? nope to many issue's still.

Higher clock rate is exactly what is the issue with threadripper even there creators came back on this with a bios update to disable for gaming half of its cores ( practically half of the cpu ) to push mhz forwards. Sorry but higher mhz specially for PC is far far far more useful then more cores on for every game. You only need a x amount of cores however tho. So that's incorrect.

Poor software optimization will always be there. And that's why mhz will be far more interesting then more cores. DX12 isn't something most devs want to burn there hands on, or optimize even remotely for. Everything is still based around a few fast cores. And even ryzen realizes this and pushes more mhz forwards. If it's not for gamings now it's for games that are now builded or coming in the future, or even for emulation. It also is far more interesting for BC titles of older generations that gets massive increases on it. It also is more favorable for developers.

PS

Thread ripper can actually make sense for gaming tho, if you plan on having a cpu+motherboard+ram for a really really long time and don't mind burning money for it and worse "early-erea" performance just too never having to touch it again.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Interesting, maybe they will keep pushing then. Somehow i got the feeling tho that 5ghz isn't going to happen or those cpu's are going to cost a fortune. As they are just specially binned.



Obviously i am talking about gaming here and not work station related stuff. If i would care for work station solutions that use tons of CPU cores i would not even opt for threadripper to start with.

Thread ripper is like having multiple gpu's. People that have it hate it, people that don't have it want it and when they do next gen they will drop it for a faster single gpu again. Why? because it simple isn't working in most games and won't be working well even in future titles which makes half of those cores being utterly and completely useless.

Higher clock rate is exactly what is the issue with threadripper even there creators came back on this with a bios update to disable for gaming half of its cores ( practically half of the cpu ) to push mhz forwards. Sorry but higher mhz specially for PC is far far far more useful then more cores on for every game. You only need a x amount of cores however tho. So that's incorrect.

Poor software optimization will always be there. And that's why mhz will be far more interesting then more cores. DX12 isn't something most devs want to burn there hands on, or optimize even remotely for. Everything is still based around a few fast cores. And even ryzen realizes this and pushes more mhz forwards. If it's not for gamings now it's for gaming that are now builded or coming in the future, or even for emulation. It also is far more interesting for BC titles of older generations that gets massive increases on it. It also is more favorable for developers.

More CPU cores are like more Shader Units on GPU’s growing and useful. Would a single threaded 40 GHz core be faster and easier to use than a 8 core 5 GHz CPU? Yes, but frequency scaling is plateauing so PC game developers will have to adap like consoles developers are and like developers of many other fields have.

 

[J4K]

Interesting, maybe they will keep pushing then. Somehow i got the feeling tho that 5ghz isn't going to happen or those cpu's are going to cost a fortune. As they are just specially binned.



Obviously i am talking about gaming here and not work station related stuff. If i would care for work station solutions that use tons of CPU cores i would not even opt for threadripper to start with.

Thread ripper is like having multiple gpu's. People that have it hate it, people that don't have it want it and when they do next gen they will drop it for a faster single gpu again. Why? because it simple isn't working in most games and won't be working well even in future titles which makes half of those cores being utterly and completely useless.

There is nothing more fun when seeing a CPU limit and then your CPU displays 10%usage. But but optimization, no not really. you just bought a dud of a CPU for the tasks you are throwing at it. Because in reality of things devs see only 0.000001% of there audience having a threadripper or a 16 core cpu and simple put resources in something else. But even if the market shifts will it be the focus? nope to many issue's still.

Higher clock rate is exactly what is the issue with threadripper even there creators came back on this with a bios update to disable for gaming half of its cores ( practically half of the cpu ) to push mhz forwards. Sorry but higher mhz specially for PC is far far far more useful then more cores on for every game. You only need a x amount of cores however tho. So that's incorrect.

Poor software optimization will always be there. And that's why mhz will be far more interesting then more cores. DX12 isn't something most devs want to burn there hands on, or optimize even remotely for. Everything is still based around a few fast cores. And even ryzen realizes this and pushes more mhz forwards. If it's not for gamings now it's for games that are now builded or coming in the future, or even for emulation. It also is far more interesting for BC titles of older generations that gets massive increases on it. It also is more favorable for developers.

I feel like you fundamentally miss the point of Threadripper.

It's like you're trying to enter a pickup truck in a race against sports cars.

 

[lukilladog]

Cpu cores are not like shader cores in graphics, graphics work on different kind of instructions that can scale almost linearly to the number of cores in gpu´s.

 

[Insane Metal]

16 core Ryzen+ on PS5 please.

Spoiler

I fucking wish

 

[scydrex]

They need higher clocks and better single core performance first.

 

[Silver Wattle]

Why would it be 6 vs 8?
I’d imagine they would all be 8core but binned accordingly for yields. It’s a practice they already do now.

Current AMD 8 core Ryzen chips are two 4 core CCX clusters.

 

[Dontero]

Also if rumor is true then there will be 6 cores per CCX. Which means new Threadripper should be 4 x 6. 24core 48 thread.

Yea and they also realized how bad of a idea that was.

They need higher clocks. I wish they would move more towards 6ghz rather then more cores.

Threadripper is awesome for playing games and work. IDK what you are talking about. There are SOME cases where it is a bit worse but in 95% of circumstances it doesn't matter.

Too many cores, I'd personally like to see the speed per core go up to be honest.

You can forget about higher clocks. 5,5-5,7 will be max they will ever reach.
Problem here is that when you increase frequency you need to up voltage. And in math it looks like voltage is effectively CUBED. Which means at 5Ghz it starts to go into insane area. Secondly if voltage wasn't the problem you would also have with real physical problems as 5Ghz it means 5 billions oscilation per second which means that there is physical limit of how fast things can switch.

This echoes my initial thought...what does higher core count mean for clock rates? Can 7nm allow for an increase in both?

Higher clockrates toward 5Ghz ? Yup. Toward 6Ghz-7Ghz ? No
Generally speaking 7nm means smaller die and better clocks.

Higher core count = lower clocks speeds.

That is not always true. It depends on binning. For example Threadripper runs at 4Ghz and can sustain it on all cores which is exactly the same clock for Ryzen7 1800X. IT depends on binning.

Secondly let us not forget taht AMD doesn't actually make 16 core chips. They make 4 dies not one to make 16 core cpu which means that they don't need to look for perfect 16 core chip but for 4 good chips to hit high clocks.

 

[diable]

Yea and they also realized how bad of a idea that was.

They need higher clocks. I wish they would move more towards 6ghz rather then more cores.

Bingo. AMD needs to up their ipc because adding more cores isn't advantageous for most users. Let's be honest most users don't stream to Twitch, edit video or do 3d modeling. Six fast cores is all most people need.

 

[Locuza]

Also if rumor is true then there will be 6 cores per CCX. Which means new Threadripper should be 4 x 6. 24core 48 thread.
[...]

It's actually not a rumour but just a guess based on some slides which VideoCardZ leaked with Starship:

https://videocardz.com/69428/amd-snowy-owl-naples-starship-grey-hawk-river-hawk-great-horned-owl

Instead of 2x6 cores per die it could be more likely be 3x4 cores.

Which does appear logical if you also look at Grey Hawk and River Hawk which are APUs (which you see in another slide) and using the current CCX variants with 4 or 2 cores.
Having one CCX with 6 cores would mean AMD developed another variant which would be quite challanging from an interconnect and latency perspective in comparison to staying at 4 cores.
So I rather bet on 3x4.

 

[RedVIper]

Bingo. AMD needs to up their ipc because adding more cores isn't advantageous for most users. Let's be honest most users don't stream to Twitch, edit video or do 3d modeling. Six fast cores is all most people need.

AMD's IPC is fine right now, its their clocks is a bit lower than than Intel, anyway there's a reason we have been stuck at the same frequencies since forever, there are physical limitations to this, at the start we had big improvements, performance was almost being doubled every other year by just upping the frequencies,we thought we would be way more ahead of where we are now , but it got to a point where it just couldn't be done,.

And why don't most users need more cores?(Why did you just decide that 6 is the ideal number?) By the same logic most users don't need higher frequencies because most users are just browsing the internet. If you're talking about games, they can be made to run on more cores, they haven't been because intel stagnated the market at 4 cores for years and years.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Too many cores, I'd personally like to see the speed per core go up to be honest.

I think the way they combine lower core count chips, the infinity fabric, allows them to more easily achieve high clock speed while simultaneously increasing core count.

Also if rumor is true then there will be 6 cores per CCX. Which means new Threadripper should be 4 x 6. 24core 48 thread.
.

Heard AMD unveiled a 32 core threadripper model to ship this year.

 

[llien]

They have 32 core Threadripper 2 at 250W.

AMD's "infinity fabric" allows to combine smaller chips into bigger one ("glue them together").
Technically the new Threadripper is 8 times 4 core.
This approach makes producing CPUs with large core count much cheaper than traditional monolithic cores.

 

[Alexander DeLarge]

Too many cores, I'd personally like to see the speed per core go up to be honest.

The Ryzen architecture benefits greatly from properly multithreaded programs. It's time for game developers to get with the fucking times and start distributing the load between multiple threads efficiently because it's absolutely ridiculous that many PC games only take advantage of two or three threads and the rest idle at 5% utilization.

 

[vitmanov]

On the off chance that epyc is intended to hop to 48/96.... at that point there must be an adjustment in Zen's center courses of action, be it the "I think" far-fetched 3x CCX quad center or the almost certain 2x CCX 6 center game plan.

 

[Boss Mog]

If they do end up making a 16-core, I bet they'll name it Ryzen 9 since intel has core i9 now as its flagship.