Wednesday, January 2nd 2019
Alleged AMD Ryzen 3000 Series CPU Lineup Leaked by Russian E-Tailer
As we're coming up on CES, cameos and details (but mostly speculation) on AMD's upcoming Ryzen 3000 series are becoming more and more ubiquitous. Not the least of which is the recent listing of what seems to be AMD's line-up for that same processor series. Based on the 7 nm process, AMD's "Matisse" Ryzen 3000 series will bring about an evolutionary change on the way AMD's processors are arranged, with the "chiplet" approach allowing for an even more streamlined, scalable, cheaper design that can go all the way from a relatively basic 4-core CPU (which could belong to the Athlon range) all the way up to an (allegedly) 16-core Ryzen 9 3800X.
And thus the floodgates are open. The leaked top of the food chain for AMD's Ryzen 3000 series is the Ryzen 9 3800X, which ups the tiers on AMD's lineup to four (Ryzen 3, 5, 7 and 9), and which reportedly ships with an incredible (remember this, if true, is being supported on the AM4 platform) 16-core, 32-thread, 3.9 GHz base, 4.7 GHz boost, and 125 W TDP processor. That's a Threadripper on the consumer segment, and you can bet it will go for much, much less than the original 16-core CPU went for.
The Ryzen 7 tier sees an increase to a 12-core, 24-thread design under the new 3000 serie; the Ryzen 7 3700X and 3700 feature the same core counts, but base and boost clocks of 4.2/5.0 GHz and 3.8/4.6 GHz. If true, this means that the 12-core Ryzen 7 3700X would see the highest ever core count and core clock on an AMD Ryzen 7 CPU, by a long margin. The 105 W and 95 W TDP on eachmodel, respectively, pale in comparison to their respective core counts and frequencies.
The Ryzen 5 now becomes the baseline for AMD's 8-core CPUs, with the 3600X and 3600 enjoying a 4.0/4.8 GHz and 3.6/4.4 GHz base and boost clocks, respectively. If the leaks are correct, an increase of 400 MHz in the Boost cock for an 8-core, "Matisse" design still requires an additional 30 W TDp headroom over the (expectedly and apparently) better positioned in the frequency/power curve Ryzen 5 3600, with its tightly controlled TDP of 65 W.
Finishing up AMD's Ryzen 3000 series lineup would be the 6-core, 12-thread Ryzen 3 3300X and 3300, running at 3.5/4.3 and 3.2/4.0 GHz clocks, in a 65 W and 50 W TDp package, respectively. Hold on to your hats. If these leaks are true (and take them with metric tons of salt), this could get either very ugly, or beautiful.
And thus the floodgates are open. The leaked top of the food chain for AMD's Ryzen 3000 series is the Ryzen 9 3800X, which ups the tiers on AMD's lineup to four (Ryzen 3, 5, 7 and 9), and which reportedly ships with an incredible (remember this, if true, is being supported on the AM4 platform) 16-core, 32-thread, 3.9 GHz base, 4.7 GHz boost, and 125 W TDP processor. That's a Threadripper on the consumer segment, and you can bet it will go for much, much less than the original 16-core CPU went for.
69 Comments on Alleged AMD Ryzen 3000 Series CPU Lineup Leaked by Russian E-Tailer
Skylake is way far ahead of zen thanks to intel's superior memory controller and lower latency interconnect and caches. Zen + began to close that gap, improving on all 3 fronts. Their final trick up their sleeve is insane clock speeds, but intel had been smacking into that 5GHz barrier for awhile, and AMD is beginning to catch up there as well. If ryzen 2000 could hit 5 GHz then even in extreme CPU tests the difference would be minimal, even at 4.6 GHz the real world difference in games is nil for most people, unless you are using a 2080ti at 1080p240.
If ryzen 3000 cant clock any higher but arrives with a 15% IPC bump all around, or clocks 200MHz higher with a 10% IPC bump, intel will have the lower performance chips. Its like the late 90s all over again, thunderbird v pentium III.
Furthermore there is no difference in IPC currently with Zen+ VS. CoffeeLake. It depends on the application, and even the game. I have seen plenty of games (like battlefield) where AMD actually has slightly better IPC than Intel. If AMD really matches Intel in clockspeeds, and gains even a 10% IPC increase - it is completely lights out.
Yes, 2019-2020 will be awesome years for PC hardware.... especially compared to 2016-2018....
Sunny Cove is a newly designed core, and holds at least as many changes as Skylake did in 2015.
Zen 2 on the other hand is an iteration of Zen.Nice try, stop trolling.
Looks like it was faked:
Amd/comments/abxbph
I'm still very skeptical with AdoredTV's specs, like I said elsewhere, the base clocks on some of the CPUs are ludicrous and give it away (4.2 and 4.3Ghz BASE clocks on two of the SKUs).
As for Sunny Cove's arch changes - we don't know what they will achieve with the changes. Skylake added like 5% IPC btw lol, nothing to brag about.
X299 is equal or surpassed in ipc in many cases, which is impressive.
CFL is something else though, Ryzen is either Leading (where SMT is well utilized) or decompressing using 7zip but all other cases they do loose with good 10% margins.
They are related to just IPC often but often in games it's the latency but they are not far from CFL by any means, easily on par overall if rumors of 10%++ is true, even at 10% + AVX boost will make it a even IPC match depending on task imho.
it's not black and white and an absolute IPC number we should really look at.
tpucdn.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_9600K/images/relative-performance-cpu.png
tpucdn.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_9600K/images/relative-performance-games-1920-1080.png
I don't know how anyone can look at those charts and say Intel has an advantage in anything besides clockspeed. It depends on the task, and there will never be an exact or perfect estimate. It depends on what YOU do, but come on this is semantics - the IPC is roughly the same now.
What I am REALLY curious about is how well Zen 2's new architecture improves in gaming applications. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets 20-30% higher IPC in professional apps, but I would be blown away if it could improve IPC by even 10% in 1080p and 1440p gaming. Zen 2 would finally be the upgrade for 144Hz gaming I am looking for when you consider it would also be clocked 20% higher than Zen+.
I'm not in any doubt that Ice Lake will be the first IPC increase from Intel in years, and it'll likely be good, but there's still a decent chance that AMD might catch up (or close to it) as we haven't seen a >10% IPC improvement for Intel in a single refresh in a decade.
When I bought my 1600X a year and a half ago, I sure wasn't thinking that I'd be tempted to upgrade it this soon, but if the clock speed increases are this good and it's a drop-in replacement, that'll be mighty tempting. Given that this leak is even remotely accurate, of course.
2) You missed the point entirely.
Intel/AMD reach this goal with various tradeoffs and I think Rome solution with chiplets will be a big hit and many companies will follow suit.
PC hardware cannot be compared to mobile. They have entirely different purposes and focus. You can't say that Apple A12X is better than say a Core i5 or a Ryzen 5, just because it gets higher scores in geekbench.
Also, lets be honest. You could complain about AMD being weak when they had Bulldozer, but now the 10% difference in gaming is just nitpicking. Both are great choices and now the price argument that AMD always used is working very well for them.
We can't say for sure what the situation with Zen 2 and Icelake will be, but we can certainly say that AMD will be in a better position that it was before. The chiplet architecture allows them to play with core counts, to get great yields, to reuse partially bad chiplets for lower end models (say an 12 core could be made from a 8 core chiplet and a 4 core (defective 4) one). We'll see what Intel will use with Ice lake, but I am pretty certain that at least this generation, they will still be stuck with monolithic dies, which is a major downside.
Only time will tell...