# AMD "Zen" A Monolithic Core Design



## btarunr (Apr 13, 2015)

AMD's upcoming "Zen" architecture will see a major change in the way the company designs its CPU cores. It will be a departure from the "module" core design introduced with "Bulldozer," in which two cores with shared resources constitute the indivisible unit of a multi-core processor. A "Zen" core will have dedicated resources in a way things used to be before "Bulldozer," and only the last-level cache (L3 cache), will be shared between cores. "Zen" will also implement SMT, much in the same way as Intel processors do, with HyperThreading Technology.

The first implementation of "Zen" will be an insanely powerful APU (on paper anyway), featuring 16 physical "Zen" CPU cores, 32 logical CPUs enabled with SMT, 512 KB dedicated L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's ISA instruction set will see a spring-cleaning, with the removal of underused instruction-sets, and the introduction of new ones. Other features on this APU are equally surprising - a quad-channel DDR4 integrated memory controller, a separate HBM (high-bandwidth memory) controller dedicated to the integrated graphics, with up to 512 GB/s bandwidth, and an integrated graphics core featuring "Greenland-class" stream processors. Given that AMD is able to build 7-billion transistor GPUs on existing 28 nm processes, building an APU with these chops doesn't sound far-fetched. The company could still have to rely on a newer fab.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Chaitanya (Apr 13, 2015)

I hope we see cpus without integrated gpu based on this architecture.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Apr 13, 2015)

looks yummy (on paper ... duh!), time will tell if i stay on Intel (oohhh i made a rhyme) or swap back to AMD for a full red setup


----------



## Ebo (Apr 13, 2015)

I have high hopes for AMD with the Zen project, and I hope they pull a rabbit out of the hat this time, but time will tell.


----------



## micropage7 (Apr 13, 2015)

looks promising and seriously i think AMD should move their point than just challenging intel, they should offer something better and new since intel's performance is hard to catch


----------



## HumanSmoke (Apr 13, 2015)

...and just like that it is like CMT never was.


----------



## Mussels (Apr 13, 2015)

cant half tell this is designed for DX12 gaming


----------



## Lionheart (Apr 13, 2015)

Pretty much sums up my reaction to what I just read.









BUT!!! I will remain skeptical until released... We all know what happened with Bulldozer 







None the less I'm still exited for AMD's R9 390 series GPU's & their Zen platform, I just hope they finally get some profiteering flowing


----------



## NC37 (Apr 13, 2015)

And without the GPU what would we get? 32 cores + SMT, meaning 64 cores? I hope so.

Holy crap I do believe handbrake just got aroused.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 13, 2015)

Damn, I hope they deliver.  If AMD is selling 16 core consumer processors, Intel will have to respond by slashing the prices on their 6+ core Xeon products with plans to make 6+ cores mainstream in future releases.  I really, _really_, *really* hate the fact you have to buy LGA-2011 to get 6+ cores.

There's a lot to like here and the huge news maker isn't the 16 cores, it's an integrated GPU with...an unbelievable...16 GB of memory on the same die.  Too...unbelievable...  If true though, that is one very, very serious APU in a very small package.  It has next-gen consoles and Steam boxes written all over it.



NC37 said:


> And without the GPU what would we get? 32 cores + SMT, meaning 64 cores? I hope so.


No, 16 physical cores and 16 logical cores for a total of 32 threads at once.


----------



## Mussels (Apr 13, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Damn, I hope they deliver.  If AMD is selling 16 core consumer processors, Intel will have to respond by slashing the prices on their 6+ core Xeon products with plans to make 6+ cores mainstream in future releases.  I really, _really_, *really* hate the fact you have to buy LGA-2011 to get 6+ cores.
> 
> There's a lot to like here and the huge news maker isn't the 16 cores, it's an integrated GPU with...an unbelievable...16 GB of memory on the same die.  Too...unbelievable...  If true though, that is one very, very serious APU in a very small package.  It has next-gen consoles and Steam boxes written all over it.
> 
> ...




dont forget the rumours that DX12 allows sharing/adding of VRAM in multi GPU, that 16GB could be insane


----------



## bogami (Apr 13, 2015)

Thes cood be good. well will see


----------



## gaximodo (Apr 13, 2015)

what happened to "real man uses real cores"


----------



## techy1 (Apr 13, 2015)

...if you multiply 0 with anything you get 0.... so:  0 x 16 or 32 = still 0 core valude CPU.... well I hope AMD pulls out something more than 0 and can make big turnover and profit out of that... but I know AMD and those powerslides - according to those - Intel preformance was and is lightyears behind - but in reality is diferent


----------



## Dent1 (Apr 13, 2015)

gaximodo said:


> what happened to "real man uses real cores"



They gave you REAL cores with Bulldozer and Piledriver, then fan boys complained it wasn't a "REAL" core because its hidden within a module. AMD can't win.



techy1 said:


> .. I hope AMD pulls out something more than 0 and can make big turnover and profit out of that..



Turnover and profit relies mostly on marketing efforts, contracts secured, business operation efficiency etc. Product performance, not so much.


----------



## Parn (Apr 13, 2015)

Wow! The spec looks fantastic.

Maybe this is AMD's ticket for coming back to the high-end market. Let's hope there will be a HEDT version (ie. no integrated graphics) to compete with the 2011v3 platform.

My main rig used to be primarily AMD based, but switched to Intel since 1st gen i series. There is still a Phenom II X4 box remaining. Will upgrade this one if Zen delivers.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Apr 13, 2015)

Dent1 said:


> They gave you REAL cores with Bulldozer and Piledriver, then fan boys complained it wasn't a "REAL" core because its hidden within a module. AMD can't win.


So AMD ditched a whole CMT-based architecture because some forum warriors yukked it up on a few tech sites? I think that redefines "hyper sensitive".
Given that the CMT-module architecture begun with BD was aimed squarely at the server market which AMD triumphantly (and prematurely) touted as architecture to take x86 enterprise market share off Intel...which in reality led to AMD's market share plummeting to 1.5%, it would seem that it was more than a few fanboys that killed the architecture. When AMD themselves are on record as stating that the architecture was an unmitigated failure, it's a little hard to lay the blame at the feet of a few forum posters don't you think?


Parn said:


> Maybe this is AMD's ticket for coming back to the high-end market. Let's hope there will be a HEDT version (ie. no integrated graphics) to compete with the 2011v3 platform.


Could be feasible - CPU + 8 or 16GB of HBM RAM on interposer could be a potent package. AMD could shave off the unnecessary logic ( the DDR4 controllers would surely be aimed at server only since HBM couldn't provide the density for enterprise deployment).


----------



## librin.so.1 (Apr 13, 2015)

I just spontaneously came in my pants.


----------



## Dent1 (Apr 13, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> So AMD ditched a whole CMT-based architecture because some forum warriors yukked it up on a few tech sites? I think that redefines "hyper sensitive".
> Given that the CMT-module architecture begun with BD was aimed squarely at the server market which AMD triumphantly (and prematurely) touted as architecture to take x86 enterprise market share off Intel...which in reality led to AMD's market share plummeting to 1.5%, it would seem that it was more than a few fanboys that killed the architecture. When AMD themselves are on record as stating that the architecture was an unmitigated failure, it's a little hard to lay the blame at the feet of a few forum posters don't you think?



I never said why AMD ditched the CMT-based architecture or was trying to speculate as to why.

I just merely pointed out that AMD  gave us real cores within a module but the definition of a "core" often came into question from certain groups of negative people.  Now they remove the modules and guys like gaximod still complain and throw the "real men use cores" statement in their faces.   This is my own personal observation.  I doubt AMD cared enough to make refinements based on this observation.

Their decision with this new architecture is likely because it meets their business needs only.


----------



## ndtoan (Apr 13, 2015)

This HPC APU will have TDPs close to 300W 
http://wccftech.com/amd-x86-zen-bas...bm-memory-greenland-igpu-ddr4-memory-support/


----------



## Parn (Apr 13, 2015)

ndtoan said:


> This HPC APU will have TDPs close to 300W
> http://wccftech.com/amd-x86-zen-bas...bm-memory-greenland-igpu-ddr4-memory-support/



300W is nothing when you consider the unit contains 16 x86 cores + integrated GPU with HBM + DDR4. A current high-end 6 core CPU + a discrete graphics solution already exceeds 390W TDP.


----------



## DarkMantle (Apr 13, 2015)

I'm a little confused. Why aren't you telling us in your article that this is just rumors based on a "leaked" slide Fudzilla got their hands on.

I love AMD as much as the next guy and want them to be profitable but making people believe this is real based on rumors is just not good for the company (and coming from Fudzilla I have no doubt that could very well be part of the reason why they posted this). This could end up worse than the Bulldozer fiasco.


----------



## ndtoan (Apr 13, 2015)

Parn said:


> 300W is nothing when you consider the unit contains 16 x86 cores + integrated GPU with HBM + DDR4. A current high-end 6 core CPU + a discrete graphics solution already exceeds 390W TDP.



TDP means that maximum heat is dissipated by CPU cooler, not power consumption.

You have to use the hi-end water cooler for CPU TDP 300w, there aren't any air cooler can handle it now.


----------



## Dent1 (Apr 13, 2015)

ndtoan said:


> TDP means that maximum heat is dissipated by CPU cooler, not power consumption.
> 
> You have to use the hi-end water cooler for CPU TDP 300w, there aren't any air cooler can handle it now.



You are missing the point.  300W TDP is low on average because there are 16 cores and an integrated GPU.

The 16 core variant is likely for server use. The commercial processors will likely be 2/4/8 core solutions.

So for a normal four core CPU it will be 300/4 = 75W which is VERY low for a four core processor with integrated GPU in its first revision.


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 13, 2015)

DarkMantle said:


> I'm a little confused. Why aren't you telling us in your article that this is just rumors based on a "leaked" slide Fudzilla got their hands on.
> 
> I love AMD as much as the next guy and want them to be profitable but making people believe this is real based on rumors is just not good for the company (and coming from Fudzilla I have no doubt that could very well be part of the reason why they posted this). This could end up worse than the Bulldozer fiasco.


I thought it was pretty obvious where it was sourced from. I think your first sentence summed it up nicely.
Zen is a rumored architecture and anything printed is purely speculation for now.


----------



## qubit (Apr 13, 2015)

This sounds great and I'm not completely surprised, since the new guy at the top apparently has turned around other businesses.

I'd love to see an AMD CPU/APU kick Intel's butt once more like they did a decade ago.

Let's hope this really delivers this time.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 13, 2015)

Mussels said:


> dont forget the rumours that DX12 allows sharing/adding of VRAM in multi GPU, that 16GB could be insane



OMG...  I would upgrade from my i7-4770K in A SECOND if it meant the system RAM could just be that 16GB of HBM.


----------



## Freedom4556 (Apr 13, 2015)

Not to get anybody's hopes dashed, but the instant I read "_16 cores_" and "_current process_" I immediately assumed we're looking at a game console/server-esque sub-2GHz bulk process affair. This just sounds like a double-sized, updated PS4 APU.


----------



## Krekeris (Apr 13, 2015)

Am I the only one here going to get one of these badboys to browse internet and watch youtube?


----------



## GhostRyder (Apr 13, 2015)

Wow, well on paper this sounds fantastic and like a real winner if they get their IPC up enough to compensate.  The GPU portion could be a real winner on its own but if the CPU disappoints then its only good on the server market (Where VM's and such need just a bunch of cores instead of single powerful cores).

Not sure what I really think beyond it sounds great on paper though.  It could really be a huge step up from them and I am sure it will be lots better than the previous gen CPU's, however it will come down to how much on a clock to clock ratio as to whether these things are just good or fantastic.


----------



## DarkMantle (Apr 13, 2015)

Caring1 said:


> I thought it was pretty obvious where it was sourced from. I think your first sentence summed it up nicely.
> Zen is a rumored architecture and anything printed is purely speculation for now.


 
Well it probably is for some people but not for everybody, just take a look at some of the comments. Most of other sites that are also reporting on this story do tell their readers these are rumors or could very well be a complete fabrication. I think it is important to say when a story is based on unconfirmed sources. That is all.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Apr 13, 2015)

Freedom4556 said:


> [...]I immediately assumed we're looking at a game console/server-esque sub-2GHz bulk process affair. This just sounds like a double-sized, updated PS4 APU.



The APU in PS4 (same goes for Xbone) is of the Jaguar µArch, which is AMD's low-power µArch currently being replaced by its rafinement – Puma.
Meanwhile, Zen is a *new* µArch – a completely new design.

So, it can't be, in any way, just one "beefy" updated Jaguar, i.e. Puma.


----------



## Countryside (Apr 13, 2015)

If everything goes well then AMD can say goodbye to Underdog status . If they fail it will be a sad day in cpu history.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Apr 13, 2015)

Vinska said:


> The APU in PS4 (same goes for Xbone) is of the Jaguar µArch, which is AMD's low-power µArch currently being replaced by its rafinement – Puma.
> Meanwhile, Zen is a *new* µArch – a completely new design.
> 
> So, it can't be, in any way, just one "beefy" updated Jaguar, i.e. Puma.



I completely agree. There is no way in hell they can manage to fit 16 beefy cores on one single die with the available production technology. This smells a lot like 16 tiny cores similar in performance to Puma/Atom. Or in the best case 16 medium sized cores similar in performance to Piledriver/Steamroller and clocked low to keep the heat to reasonable levels. This would pretty much make it useless for gaming/productivity tasks...


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 13, 2015)

Looks like I'll be having difficulty deciding between Skylake and Zen. It looks amazing on paper and it just might be a reason to go with AMD this time around. AMD's certainly have that "zen" feeling to them when you own them.


----------



## micropage7 (Apr 13, 2015)

with many and many and many cores i think AMD  should improve their per core performance, many cores is good but until now i think we miss the opportunity having many cores since only few cores that fully utilized  except you do heavy task


----------



## btarunr (Apr 13, 2015)

DarkMantle said:


> I'm a little confused. Why aren't you telling us in your article that this is just rumors based on a "leaked" slide Fudzilla got their hands on.



I linked to that article..


----------



## Jorge (Apr 13, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> I hope we see cpus without integrated gpu based on this architecture.



Yeah, it's called Zen. Zen is the CPU and it's cores are so good they are going in the next AMD APU iterations. Zen was developed to be a discrete CPU first and then the cores added to the next gen APUs.


----------



## Jorge (Apr 13, 2015)

DarkMantle said:


> I'm a little confused. Why aren't you telling us in your article that this is just rumors based on a "leaked" slide Fudzilla got their hands on.
> 
> I love AMD as much as the next guy and want them to be profitable but making people believe this is real based on rumors is just not good for the company (and coming from Fudzilla I have no doubt that could very well be part of the reason why they posted this). This could end up worse than the Bulldozer fiasco.



It's real and not based on rumors. The 16 core APUs are intended for enterprise, not consumers. Eight cores is more than enough for any consumer applications. SMT will help compensate for the poorly written code that exists.


----------



## 64K (Apr 13, 2015)

micropage7 said:


> with many and many and many cores i think AMD  should improve their per core performance, many cores is good but until now i think we miss the opportunity having many cores since only few cores that fully utilized  except you do heavy task



Well, from a gaming perspective more cores might turn out to be faster overall even if they are slower individually. One of the many promises of DX12 is that it will make better use of additional cores. We'll see.


----------



## TRWOV (Apr 13, 2015)

HMB controller along with a DDR4 one? So we'll see HBM sticks soon?

AMD should at least match Sandy Bridge's IPC this time, otherwise the same story will repeat... and please, don't call these "FX".


----------



## MikeMurphy (Apr 13, 2015)

This is a server chip guys.  You think AMD would waste money giving consumers 16 cores?

They also look like jaguar derivatives.


----------



## wiak (Apr 13, 2015)

this looks interesting


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 13, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> I hope we see cpus without integrated gpu based on this architecture.



Not likely going to happen.  Just like Intel, all AMD's CPUs will have integrated graphics.  The most we can hope for is a CPU with the GPU portion disabled.


----------



## Dent1 (Apr 13, 2015)

TRWOV said:


> AMD should at least match Sandy Bridge's IPC this time, otherwise the same story will repeat... and please, don't call these "FX".



You are talking from the point of view of a techie and enthusiast. not from a businessman or significant shareholder.

You want performance for your own selfish needs, which is fine, but don't pretend more performance will magically change the "story" without a strategic business plan.


----------



## Petey Plane (Apr 13, 2015)

MikeMurphy said:


> This is a server chip guys.  You think AMD would waste money giving consumers 16 cores?
> 
> They also look like jaguar derivatives.





HalfAHertz said:


> I completely agree. There is no way in hell they can manage to fit 16 beefy cores on one single die with the available production technology. This smells a lot like 16 tiny cores similar in performance to Puma/Atom. Or in the best case 16 medium sized cores similar in performance to Piledriver/Steamroller and clocked low to keep the heat to reasonable levels. This would pretty much make it useless for gaming/productivity tasks...




AMD been selling 16 core chips for at least 3 years already


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 13, 2015)

Petey Plane said:


> AMD been selling 16 core chips for at least 3 years already



Exactly.  Everyone seems to  be forgetting this.  14nm will allow over double the density so I see no problem with them fitting all this stuff while improving IPC a ton.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 13, 2015)

Petey Plane said:


> AMD been selling 16 core chips for at least 3 years already





Captain_Tom said:


> Exactly.  Everyone seems to  be forgetting this.  14nm will allow over double the density so I see no problem with them fitting all this stuff while improving IPC a ton.



Yep, and they've been doing it on 32nm too...with 115w TDPs...


----------



## Devon68 (Apr 13, 2015)

Meh


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Apr 13, 2015)

I so hope zen is good. my 6300 is starting to show its age, and im trying to hold out. a zen cpu+microatx board+r9 390x sounds perfect.


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 13, 2015)

I remember the advertising hype just before Bulldozer came out. 

AMD's Ad guys had everyone worked up into a frenzy with a lot of fantastic, dubious claims about its performance.
Then, It came out and everyone was underwhelmed and pissed off about it.
They took a huge PR hit then, and not long afterwards, they fired most of the Ad guys responsible.

I think that they learned from that and have toned down the rhetoric since then.

Me, I'm now cautious about new releases. I want to see reviews, and not just one of them either. 
I want to read about other's experiences with brand new tech before I spend money getting into it. 
I don't care if I'm the first one to have something anymore.

Zen ~sounds~ really good, but show me the reviews first.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 13, 2015)

Gentleman, brace yourself. This is going to be a new socket and with 64 PCI-E lanes (over 40 on skt2011) and quad-channel memory, we're looking at a massive size for this processor just to accommodate the pinning of such a CPU, which means AMD will have a lot of area to work with. The picture shows SATA and GBe as interfaces on the CPU which would also technically make this CPU a SoC, like the AM1 (except on crack). This may push AMD to adopt LGA sockets for consumer CPUs which I'm 100% for due to the number of pins on such a CPU.

I find this very interesting in general that it's an SoC and has a lot of functionality. Board layouts with a performance-level SoC should be *very* interesting to see. (Take a peak at Asus' C2750 workstation/nas board.) Since there would be no north bridge or pch-like chips, it allows for more area to do other things directly off PCI-E and not use the PCH/(chipset/SB) for PCI-E lanes which introduces latency.

All in all, I think this is great. I would love to see where this goes.


----------



## erocker (Apr 13, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> ...and just like that it is like CMT never was.


Well.. they tried. lol.


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Apr 13, 2015)

Aquinus said:


> Gentleman, brace yourself. This is going to be a new socket and with 64 PCI-E lanes (over 40 on skt2011) and quad-channel memory, we're looking at a massive size for this processor just to accommodate the pinning of such a CPU, which means AMD will have a lot of area to work with. The picture shows SATA and GBe as interfaces on the CPU which would also technically make this CPU a SoC, like the AM1 (except on crack). This may push AMD to adopt LGA sockets for consumer CPUs which I'm 100% for due to the number of pins on such a CPU.
> 
> I find this very interesting in general that it's an SoC and has a lot of functionality. Board layouts with a performance-level SoC should be *very* interesting to see. (Take a peak at Asus' C2750 workstation/nas board.) Since there would be no north bridge or pch-like chips, it allows for more area to do other things directly off PCI-E and not use the PCH/(chipset/SB) for PCI-E lanes which introduces latency.
> 
> All in all, I think this is great. I would love to see where this goes.


consumer cpus have been lga for over 20 years. im assuming you meant BGA, which would never happen. remember the backlash intel got from that? AMD wouldnt weather such backlash nearly as well.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Apr 13, 2015)

TheinsanegamerN said:


> consumer cpus have been lga for over 20 years. im assuming you meant BGA, which would never happen. remember the backlash intel got from that? AMD wouldnt weather such backlash nearly as well.



He did mean LGA. Since AMD CPUs, unlike Intel's, are/were mostly PGA till now.


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Apr 13, 2015)

Vinska said:


> He did mean LGA. Since AMD CPUs, unlike Intel's, are/were mostly PGA till now.


oh yeah. whoops. forgot PGA was different from LGA.


----------



## rruff (Apr 13, 2015)

Freedom4556 said:


> Not to get anybody's hopes dashed, but the instant I read "_16 cores_" and "_current process_" I immediately assumed we're looking at a game console/server-esque sub-2GHz bulk process affair. This just sounds like a double-sized, updated PS4 APU.



I'm underwhelmed by massive numbers of threads also. If it's a "current process" and reasonable power consumption, then it will be slow. 

I guess that is where we are headed though, now that progress in single core speed has stalled. It sucks for computations that can't be done in parallel.


----------



## MikeMurphy (Apr 13, 2015)

Petey Plane said:


> AMD been selling 16 core chips for at least 3 years already



For servers.  The huge cache and HBM also suggest servers.  No doubt they included a small GPU for functionality, and therefore called it an "APU".

I'm not sure why everyone is getting their panties in a twist over server chips.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 13, 2015)

Because a server chip wouldn't have up to 16 GB of dedicated VRAM.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Apr 13, 2015)

Petey Plane said:


> AMD been selling 16 core chips for at least 3 years already


Factually, 16 core Opteron is no more a single chip than Magny Cours, Core 2 Quad, or Pentium D.
It is two chips bound on a common substrate, under a common heatsink, in an MCM package.


Aquinus said:


> Gentleman, brace yourself. This is going to be a new socket and with 64 PCI-E lanes (over 40 on skt2011) and quad-channel memory, we're looking at a massive size for this processor just to accommodate the pinning of such a CPU


With the pin count and the fact that it has HBM on-package, I would sincerely doubt that this would be a conventional socketed processor. More likely the CPU + HBM would be an interposer module, just as the GPU+HBM are expected to be.


MikeMurphy said:


> For servers.  The huge cache and HBM also suggest servers.  No doubt they included a small GPU for functionality, and therefore called it an "APU".


That would be my estimation also. The GPU would undoubtedly be for GPGPU ( co-processor) duty - a fairly conventional answer to Xeon Phi or Nvidia's planned Volta + ARM product lines.


----------



## Renald (Apr 13, 2015)

giving the nature of the source, and how powerful this proc seems to be (server-grade crearly), I think that it could be possible that this supposed leaked is a fake.

It could be


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 13, 2015)

People really need to realize that Zen is an architecture.  It will be used for BOTH server and desktop CPUs.


----------



## JMccovery (Apr 14, 2015)

The features and rumored TDP lead me to believe that this will be a BGA design, similar to Xeon D. I wonder exactly how many 'cores' the GPU will have. 20/16nm could make for something with a shader count that could be close to a 7850 or 7870/XT.

Hmm... 50-100% more shaders than the PS4's GPU, using GCN 1.3+ tech with half-rate DP, 16GB HBM with a 512GB/s interface, 16 CPU cores/32 threads, 4 of these on a liquid-cooled blade with 64/128GB of DDR4-3200 per chip, 16 blades per 4U cabinet, 6-8 cabinets per rack ... Holy HPC servers, Batman!

I doubt this will be built on anything older than GF or Samsung 20/16nm process.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 14, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> With the pin count and the fact that it has HBM on-package, I would sincerely doubt that this would be a conventional socketed processor. More likely the CPU + HBM would be an interposer module, just as the GPU+HBM are expected to be.


I was expecting this to be a multi-die CPU, that's not my line of reasoning. If you have skt2011 where the vast majority are used simply for quad-channel memory and 40 PCI-E lanes. I suspect even after the CPU itself is complete, the socket is going to at least be as massive as skt2011 is now. Don't forget the connections for the onboard SoC parts such as SATA and GBe.

Consider AM1 with 722 contacts. That's only for 8? PCI-E lanes, Gigabit, 2 sata ports, graphics output, and only 1 memory channel. Now compare that is a beefy SoC. 60 PCI-E lanes, 2 GBe maybe, ~6 SATA, 4 DDR4 memory channels, and maybe a little more for display output. Seriously, I think 2000 contacts is going to be optimistic. I wouldn't be surprised if it was closer to 3k if this is legit.

With that said, I'll sit back, wait, and see. Anything to add some competition in the market.

Edit: It does seem that PCI-E and SATA share the same circuitry, so more SATA means less PCI-E and more PCI-E means less SATA. I could live with that.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 14, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> Yep, and they've been doing it on 32nm too...with 115w TDPs...



The bulldozer series really was made for servers where it was right at home.  Unfortunately this was at the expense of EVERY other market.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 14, 2015)

RealNeil said:


> I remember the advertising hype just before Bulldozer came out.
> 
> AMD's Ad guys had everyone worked up into a frenzy with a lot of fantastic, dubious claims about its performance.
> Then, It came out and everyone was underwhelmed and pissed off about it.
> ...



As excited as I am for the possibilities of Zen I think almost all of us feel this way deep down.  Zen sounds amazing, but no true enthusiast buys blindly.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 14, 2015)

Well, the fact they are aware of the Bulldozer modules and problems it had explains a lot.

Btw, if I understand this correctly, AMD will have their own version of hyperthreading this time around? I love this thing with Intel CPU's. It's the reson why my ancient Core i7 920 is still so competitive. It churns out 8 threads and that still works incredibly well with file compression, video coding, audio conversion, large image processing etc. I know it's not like a full core on it's own but it certainly makes a huge difference.


----------



## Relayer (Apr 14, 2015)

qubit said:


> This sounds great and I'm not completely surprised, since the new guy at the top apparently has turned around other businesses.
> 
> I'd love to see an AMD CPU/APU kick Intel's butt once more like they did a decade ago.
> 
> Let's hope this really delivers this time.



The "Guy" at the top is named Lisa. 



			
				wikipedia said:
			
		

> *Career[edit]*
> In 1994 Su was a member of the technical staff at Texas Instruments, in its Semiconductor Process and Device Center (SPDC).[6][7]
> 
> She spent 1995 to 2007 at IBM in engineering and business management positions, including vice president of the Semiconductor Research and Development Center responsible for the strategic direction of IBM’s silicon technologies, joint development alliances, and semiconductor R&D operations.[6]
> ...



The "GUY" that was CEO before her was Rory Read. While he was at AMD everything he touched turned to salt.


----------



## Kyrios74 (Apr 14, 2015)

I wish Jim Keller to do a good job and to bring back the days of AMD k7 and k8


----------



## Dent1 (Apr 14, 2015)

Kyrios74 said:


> I wish Jim Keller to do a good job and to bring back the days of AMD k7 and k8



How do you suggest he does that?

K7 was over 15 years ago and things change, the economy was different, banks were lending more, interest rates were higher, tech companies were showered with sponsorship money and loan money, there was the big technology bubble, there was no big internet tech websites, you had to buy specialist magazines to learn about upcoming products and technologies. Desktop machines were selling like hotcakes and nobody anticipated mobile marketing taking off.  Keller can't snap his fingers and rewind time because the world was different back then.


----------



## Kyrios74 (Apr 14, 2015)

hai ragione. Il mio era un modo per esorcizzare i tempi.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Apr 14, 2015)

Kyrios74 said:


> I wish Jim Keller to do a good job and to bring back the days of AMD k7 and k8


K7 and K8 owed much to AMD's purchased IP from DEC ( just as K6 before them was the result of purchased IP from NexGen) and the people that worked on the DEC Alpha processors (including a certain Dirk Meyer) and Fred Weber. AMD doesn't have that luxury this time around.


Dent1 said:


> Desktop machines were selling like hotcakes and nobody anticipated mobile marketing taking off.


I wouldn't say that. Intel was pushing mobile computing and looking ahead to smart mobile markets even while nailing the coffin closed on NetBurst back before the turn of the new century. IIRC, Intel unilaterally scrapped the NetBurst based Timna and a few other projects and set the design teams to design low-power mobile processing (Banias/Pentium M)


----------



## cyneater (Apr 14, 2015)

I wonder if this will be like the Optron Arm processors that where meant to come out in 2014 ....

Aka its just some marketing hype and there will be no product that is made.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Apr 14, 2015)

cyneater said:


> I wonder if this will be like the Optron Arm processors that where meant to come out in 2014 ....
> Aka its just some marketing hype and there will be no product that is made.


AMD have already confirmed that the Zen architecture is x86 based. The ARM (ARMv8-A) architecture is K12.
As for marketing hype, I doubt this came from AMD - more likely clickbait from the usual suspects - and bearing in mind Faud's (Fudzilla) strike rate, I'd be more than a little wary of its veracity.


----------



## Dent1 (Apr 14, 2015)

Kyrios74 said:


> hai ragione. Il mio era un modo per esorcizzare i tempi.



Va bene mio fratello itallian lol


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 14, 2015)

Captain_Tom said:


> As excited as I am for the possibilities of Zen I think almost all of us feel this way deep down.  Zen sounds amazing, but no true enthusiast buys blindly.



I build PCs for friends. I try to match what I build to the needs that they express to me before I do their builds.  As often as I can, I make AMD CPUs a part of the build. I believe that AMD needs to survive, just to keep Intel's prices from running amuck.
The choices that we have, help us out in the long run. I also like to use AMD GPUs.

AMD is necessary in this market.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Apr 14, 2015)

RealNeil said:


> I build PCs for friends. I try to match what I build to the needs that they express to me before I do their builds.  As often as I can, I make AMD CPUs a part of the build. I believe that AMD needs to survive, just to keep Intel's prices from running amuck.
> The choices that we have, help us out in the long run. I also like to use AMD GPUs.
> 
> AMD is necessary in this market.



I also build PCs for friends and most of the time, I get them AMD cpus. While I also do it for the same reason why You do it, I mainly do it because of the simple fact that with their often quite constrained budgets, I can build them an overall much better AMD-based build than it would be possible with Intel. Intel based systems are just too damn expensive.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 14, 2015)

RealNeil said:


> I build PCs for friends. I try to match what I build to the needs that they express to me before I do their builds.  As often as I can, I make AMD CPUs a part of the build. I believe that AMD needs to survive, just to keep Intel's prices from running amuck.
> The choices that we have, help us out in the long run. I also like to use AMD GPUs.
> 
> AMD is necessary in this market.



Well a $100 FX-6300 is an easy reccomendation over a $130 i3 lol.  Once DX-12 hits the FX-6300 will compete with the weaker i5's, and the FX-8320 will be in-between the i5's and i7's that cost twice as much.  This is already true in some current well-optimized games.


----------



## costeakai (Apr 14, 2015)

incoming amd


----------



## suraswami (Apr 14, 2015)

Looking forward to Zen II.


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 14, 2015)

Captain_Tom said:


> Well a $100 FX-6300 is an easy reccomendation over a $130 i3 lol.  Once DX-12 hits the FX-6300 will compete with the weaker i5's, and the FX-8320 will be in-between the i5's and i7's that cost twice as much.  This is already true in some current well-optimized games.



The real news wouldn't be DX12 and current 6 and 8 core CPUs if Zen really is as good as they're saying it will be.

I agree that DX12 will bring better utilization of cores, but Zen will bring much more to the table if it isn't Bullshit.


----------



## Regenweald (Apr 14, 2015)

Krekeris said:


> Am I the only one here going to get one of these badboys to browse internet and watch youtube?



lol. right there with you. ON PRINCIPLE. 

p.s don't forget Twitch.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Apr 14, 2015)

Regenweald said:


> lol. right there with you. ON PRINCIPLE.
> 
> p.s don't forget Twitch.


Well I don't know all about that web browsing and youtube stuff, but I am getting one to make my Solitaire experiencing even better.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 14, 2015)

Captain_Tom said:


> Well a $100 FX-6300 is an easy reccomendation over a $130 i3 lol. Once DX-12 hits the FX-6300 will compete with the weaker i5's, and the FX-8320 will be in-between the i5's and i7's that cost twice as much. This is already true in some current well-optimized games.



For friends on a budget I still often build AM3+ rigs.  A lot of the time I throw in the FX-4350 since the extra 2 cores of the FX-6350 rarely make a difference and I've found I can push the FX-4350 to higher clocks with inexpensive coolers.  With a CoolerMaster Hyper 212 Evo I can hit 5GHz with an FX-4350 in some builds and come pretty darn close(4.8-4.9GHz) in all the rest.  And I have yet to find a game were this setup noticeably impacts gaming.


----------



## WhoDecidedThat (Apr 19, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> if I understand this correctly, AMD will have their own version of hyperthreading this time around? I love this thing with Intel CPU's. It's the reson why my ancient Core i7 920 is still so competitive. It churns out 8 threads and that still works incredibly well with file compression, video coding, audio conversion, large image processing etc. I know it's not like a full core on it's own but it certainly makes a huge difference.



It's almost like a full core because (from what I understand) today's CPUs back end is very wide and the front end almost always fails at filling it with a single thread. But with SMT the back end can be fed which results in the performance increase you end up seeing.


----------



## rruff (Apr 19, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> With a CoolerMaster Hyper 212 Evo I can hit 5GHz with an FX-4350 in some builds and come pretty darn close(4.8-4.9GHz) in all the rest.  And I have yet to find a game were this setup noticeably impacts gaming.



But you could also stick in an i3, not overclock it, and wouldn't it be just as fast? And cheaper in the long run.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 19, 2015)

blanarahul said:


> It's almost like a full core because (from what I understand) today's CPUs back end is very wide and the front end almost always fails at filling it with a single thread. But with SMT the back end can be fed which results in the performance increase you end up seeing.



Yes, but how programs and games see those "cores"? In case of HyperThreading they behave the same as physical cores even though they aren't. Where with AMD's cores, at least in Bulldozer they were presented to the OS a bit differently afaik. Never owned one so I can't say it for sure...


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 20, 2015)

rruff said:


> But you could also stick in an i3, not overclock it, and wouldn't it be just as fast? And cheaper in the long run.


No, a stock i3 isn't just as fast as a 5.0GHz FX-4350.  And by cheaper in the long run I assume you mean because of power consumption being lower, but that actually makes very little difference.  The two use almost the same power when idle, which is what state the computer is in most of the time.  So unless you are running the computer at load 24/7 you won't make up the difference.


----------



## rruff (Apr 21, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> No, a stock i3 isn't just as fast as a 5.0GHz FX-4350.  And by cheaper in the long run I assume you mean because of power consumption being lower, but that actually makes very little difference.  The two use almost the same power when idle, which is what state the computer is in most of the time.  So unless you are running the computer at load 24/7 you won't make up the difference.



Do you have any supporting evidence for that? I was curious, so looked up some benchmarks. I couldn't find any direct comparisons between a modern i3 and the FX-4350 OC'd but on stock clocks the i3 beats it by a lot. one example: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0   I think a 5 GHz OC might put it close to parity (on average), but it would be close. 

Also on power consumption a stock 4300 or 4350 seems to use ~15W more than an i3 (system power), even at idle. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_7.html#sect0 http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/6

Won't idle power consumption also increase if you OC?


----------



## Mussels (Apr 21, 2015)

rruff said:


> Do you have any supporting evidence for that? I was curious, so looked up some benchmarks. I couldn't find any direct comparisons between a modern i3 and the FX-4350 OC'd but on stock clocks the i3 beats it by a lot. one example: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0   I think a 5 GHz OC might put it close to parity (on average), but it would be close.
> 
> Also on power consumption a stock 4300 or 4350 seems to use ~15W more than an i3 (system power), even at idle. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_7.html#sect0 http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/6
> 
> Won't idle power consumption also increase if you OC?



An i3 can certainly be faster in 1-2 threaded applications, thats intels whole deal - fast performance per core.

AMD has a big core advantage, and the simple fact is its up to the user which one suits their preferences.


----------



## rruff (Apr 21, 2015)

Mussels said:


> An i3 can certainly be faster in 1-2 threaded applications, thats intels whole deal - fast performance per core.
> AMD has a big core advantage, and the simple fact is its up to the user which one suits their preferences.



That's why I showed the link. The only times an FX 4350 would take the lead are in applications that are super efficient in multi-core. In that case the 4 cores of the FX will beat the 4 threads of the i3. It wasn't the case in any of the games they tested, and no games fit that description that I'm aware of.


----------



## Mussels (Apr 21, 2015)

rruff said:


> That's why I showed the link. The only times an FX 4350 would take the lead are in applications that are super efficient in multi-core. In that case the 4 cores of the FX will beat the 4 threads of the i3. It wasn't the case in any of the games they tested, and no games fit that description that I'm aware of.



DX11 games are more heavily multi threaded with some outright requiring quads these days, which is the only reason why i dont recommend dual core i3's, unless they have HT.


----------



## rruff (Apr 21, 2015)

All the i3 desktop processors have HT.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Apr 21, 2015)

Whatever they do, I hope they retain the depth and detail available to overclockers.

whilst I can fully understand people's argument's against Am3+ and the FX chips they usually are a joy to overclock(from the point of so many options and things to push) , shit even if you never do see 5Ghz (i can)
just the arsein about alone is good for a fair few weeks of benching joy(am i weird).

no platform before or since is beating it for tweekables ,imho.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 24, 2015)

rruff said:


> Do you have any supporting evidence for that? I was curious, so looked up some benchmarks. I couldn't find any direct comparisons between a modern i3 and the FX-4350 OC'd but on stock clocks the i3 beats it by a lot. one example: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0 I think a 5 GHz OC might put it close to parity (on average), but it would be close.



You can look at something like BF4, which shows a i3-4630 getting 95FPS and the FX-4350 getting 87FPS.  Throw a 20% overclock on the FX-4350 and you'll easily gain 10FPS.  And keep in mind the i3-4630 isn't the entry level i3, it is actually $150.  The i3-4160 would be the entry level at about $125, and it is clocked 100MHz slower than the 4360 and has 1MB less cache.

Bioshock Inifite shows 146FPS vs 134FPS.  Again, a 20% overclock should net about 15FPS putting the FX in the lead.

F1 2013, same story.

Sleeping Dogs, same story.(This time look at the FX-4300, as there is no FX-4350 in the list.  The FX-4300 is actually clocked lower, so the gap would be less with an FX-4350.)



rruff said:


> Also on power consumption a stock 4300 or 4350 seems to use ~15W more than an i3 (system power), even at idle. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_7.html#sect0 http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/6
> 
> Won't idle power consumption also increase if you OC?



A 15w difference is essentially nothing.  In my area we pay about $0.10/KWh.  So assuming the computer is on 24/7/365 the cost difference would be about $13 a year in power use.

And idle power consumption doesn't increase with overclocking anymore.  You raise the maximum multiplier and the maximum voltage, but when the processor is idle it still downclocks to the idle power state.


----------



## de.das.dude (Apr 25, 2015)

amd did say they didnt have plans for the non-apu series this year... so them playing out zen with apus first does confirm that.


----------



## WhoDecidedThat (Apr 25, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Yes, but how programs and games see those "cores"? In case of HyperThreading they behave the same as physical cores even though they aren't. Where with AMD's cores, at least in Bulldozer they were presented to the OS a bit differently afaik. Never owned one so I can't say it for sure...


With HT the cores _are _presented a bit differently. If you are running 4 threads on a 4C/8T CPU it will use all 4 _physical_ cores (it will behave like a 4C/4T CPU) instead of using 2 _physical _cores and _2 logical _cores (2C/4T).


----------



## rruff (Apr 27, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> You can look at something like BF4, which shows a i3-4630 getting 95FPS and the FX-4350 getting 87FPS.  Throw a 20% overclock on the FX-4350 and you'll easily gain 10FPS.



Thanks for the info. None of the games appear to be very sensitive to CPU once you get to a decent level. 



> A 15w difference is essentially nothing.  In my area we pay about $0.10/KWh.  So assuming the computer is on 24/7/365 the cost difference would be about $13 a year in power use.



If you keep it say 4 years, that $50+ isn't trivial compared to the cost of the CPU. Once you add a decent overclocking MB and a cooler and add the electric cost, you are definitely spending more on the FX. You are in i5 territory.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Apr 27, 2015)

rruff said:


> Thanks for the info. None of the games appear to be very sensitive to CPU once you get to a decent level.
> 
> 
> 
> If you keep it say 4 years, that $50+ isn't trivial compared to the cost of the CPU. Once you add a decent overclocking MB and a cooler and add the electric cost, you are definitely spending more on the FX. You are in i5 territory.



4 years? You monster!

ALL stock coolers are trash nowadays. I won't even install one for funsies. It's a waste of time and dealing with 70+ C temps under load is a joke.


----------



## rruff (Apr 27, 2015)

TheGuruStud said:


> ALL stock coolers are trash nowadays. I won't even install one for funsies. It's a waste of time and dealing with 70+ C temps under load is a joke.



On non-OC Intel CPUs (or a mild OC) they are very adequate.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Apr 27, 2015)

rruff said:


> On non-OC Intel CPUs (or a mild OC) they are very adequate.



And they need to be quiet 

That's just not doable without a 120mm fan. MAYBE a 92mm with nice heatsink, but that's not going to happen with a cheap block of roughcut aluminum lol.


----------



## rruff (Apr 27, 2015)

TheGuruStud said:


> And they need to be quiet.



It is quiet. Just tested it and I can't hear any difference between 1100 and 1700 rpm. Max temp with full load was 61C.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 27, 2015)

rruff said:


> If you keep it say 4 years, that $50+ isn't trivial compared to the cost of the CPU. Once you add a decent overclocking MB and a cooler and add the electric cost, you are definitely spending more on the FX. You are in i5 territory.



That is also assuming you leave your computer on 24/7, which most don't.  If the computer runs 8 hours a day, which is more reasonable, the cost difference is only about $4.50 a year.

Motherboard wise, I'm spending about $100 either way I go.  And I'm putting a better cooler on either one as well.  Yeah, the stock cooler on the i3 is good enough to keep it from thermal throttling, but it in a warm room it gets loud and lets the temps get higher than I like.


----------

