Monday, September 10th 2018
AMD Announces 2nd Gen Ryzen Quad-core and Energy-Efficient Processor Models
AMD today announced the much-awaited 2nd generation Ryzen quad-core socket AM4 processors, in addition to two new E-series (energy-efficient) variants of its existing processor models. To begin with, the company announced the 4-core/8-thread Ryzen 5 2500X and the 4-core/4-thread Ryzen 3 2300X.
Unlike their predecessors that are carved out of the "Summit Ridge" silicon by disabling 2 cores per compute complex or CCX (2+2 CCX config), the 2500X and 2300X feature a 4+0 config, or an entire CCX in the "Pinnacle Ridge" silicon being disabled. This also means that the 2500X has just 8 MB of L3 cache (its predecessor has 16 MB). The 2300X is clocked at 3.50 GHz with 4.00 GHz boost, while the 2500X ticks at 3.60 GHz with 4.00 GHz boost. The TDP of both chips is rated at 65W.
AMD also released the "E" brand extension for its 2nd generation Ryzen series, with the new Ryzen 5 2600E, and the Ryzen 7 2700E. Both these chips sacrifice clock speeds for an impressive 45W TDP. The 2600E is clocked at 3.10 GHz, with 4.00 GHz (compared to 3.60 GHz ~ 4.20 GHz of the 2600X); while the 2700E ticks at 2.80 GHz, with 4.00 GHz boost (compared to 3.70 GHz ~ 4.30 GHz of the 2700X). The company didn't reveal pricing of the four chips.
Source:
Anandtech
Unlike their predecessors that are carved out of the "Summit Ridge" silicon by disabling 2 cores per compute complex or CCX (2+2 CCX config), the 2500X and 2300X feature a 4+0 config, or an entire CCX in the "Pinnacle Ridge" silicon being disabled. This also means that the 2500X has just 8 MB of L3 cache (its predecessor has 16 MB). The 2300X is clocked at 3.50 GHz with 4.00 GHz boost, while the 2500X ticks at 3.60 GHz with 4.00 GHz boost. The TDP of both chips is rated at 65W.
AMD also released the "E" brand extension for its 2nd generation Ryzen series, with the new Ryzen 5 2600E, and the Ryzen 7 2700E. Both these chips sacrifice clock speeds for an impressive 45W TDP. The 2600E is clocked at 3.10 GHz, with 4.00 GHz (compared to 3.60 GHz ~ 4.20 GHz of the 2600X); while the 2700E ticks at 2.80 GHz, with 4.00 GHz boost (compared to 3.70 GHz ~ 4.30 GHz of the 2700X). The company didn't reveal pricing of the four chips.
89 Comments on AMD Announces 2nd Gen Ryzen Quad-core and Energy-Efficient Processor Models
Fwiw, Intel has also had 4c/8t low power CPUs for quite some time (though only one per generation). Those don't make better sense either.
what is wrong having a low tdp chip which can be used for desktop and laptop ?
These could to to retail for 90$ and 130$ and crush some competition
USFF systems is a whole other thing and there the lack of IGPs is definitely a hinderance. They shouldn't have to do that. This plus the weak Vega in the newly announced Athlon would be a good fit. In desktops it's not a problem, but it is for USFF systems where you don't want extra chips producing heat.
Assuming Infinity Fabric draws 15-20W and this CPU is really 45W, it leaves awfully little for the cores. So either:
1) cores are really slow, despite the attractive 2.8GHz (how?)
2) they've seriously dialed down IF performance They make sense thanks to IGP. I've seen many AIO powered by i7-6700T.
OK. Few minutes googling and I've found a possible use. Gaming mini-PCs (like Alienware SteamMachine). They have a dGPU and they may still benefit from a low-power CPU.
AMD surely can take some market share in this niche, but it's way too small to make these CPUs sensible. They'll need to sell more.
Also, there is no competition for them to crush to begin with. Intel does not have a comparable product.
They make sense thanks to IGP. I've seen many AIO powered by i7-6700T. That is only true is these can keep those 4GHz up with load on 4 cores. Which is unknown atm, but afaik boost clocks don't tend to mean the frequency with half the cores under load.
It doesn't really matter, these don't makes sense for tech-savvy users, but at the same time, they are not sold to tech-savvy users. They'll server their purpose. It's not like they're slow CPU. It's just that when you know your workflow and do a bit of research, there are options to build a better system overall.
Intel is still reaping sales with its i3. That market needs disruption, a serious one.
Reality is somehow different today. For example where I work, the data and analytical software is indeed accessed remotely via RDP. But you still use your PC for everything that needs Internet access (since it's blocked in the remote environment), so an i3 / i5 is welcome.
However, some people in the office use SAS and they have i7s. I meant the 6- and 8-core ones.
And BTW: the single-CCX Ryzens also use IF - it's responsible for the whole I/O (including RAM). Well... the 45W does seem unrealistic compared to normal Ryzen 7. Some tuning is likely being done to keep the power consumption down. I'd love to learn your definition of "tech-savvy". :-D
Also, does it mean tech-savvy people should be compelled to custom-build their PCs from expensive parts and overclock the hell out of them?
To be honest, I don't know if you're against OEMs or low-power CPUs. ;-) I'm not saying they're slow. I'm saying they're useless. :-) So now you're suggesting OEM buyers don't know their workflow? What's happening here? :-o
This will probably go into a high-performance workstation or maybe a server lineup targeted at small business segment.
If I remember correctly, QNAP already announced a series of Ryzen-powered NAS appliances.
By tech-savvy I mean someone who knows what each part of a computer does and how to build a system without unnecessary bottlenecks. Non tech-savvy would be someone who walks into a store and asks for a computer that can browser the internet and play games.
Also, fair point about IF. But I think IF's speed is only an issue when moving data between CCXs. It can't be an issue when connecting the CCX to the RAM (that's always limited by the RAM speed, and even that is partly mitigated by caches) and other I/O is slower than RAM access.