Monday, May 23rd 2022
AMD Unveils 5 nm Ryzen 7000 "Zen 4" Desktop Processors & AM5 DDR5 Platform
AMD today unveiled its next-generation Ryzen 7000 desktop processors, based on the Socket AM5 desktop platform. The new Ryzen 7000 series processors introduce the new "Zen 4" microarchitecture, with the company claiming a 15% single-threaded uplift over "Zen 3" (16-core/32-thread Zen 4 processor prototype compared to a Ryzen 9 5950X). Other key specs about the architecture put out by AMD include a doubling in per-core L2 cache to 1 MB, up from 512 KB on all older versions of "Zen." The Ryzen 7000 desktop CPUs will boost to frequencies above 5.5 GHz. Based on the way AMD has worded their claims, it seems that the "+15%" number includes IPC gains, plus gains from higher clocks, plus what the DDR4 to DDR5 transition achieves. With Zen 4, AMD is introducing a new instruction set for AI compute acceleration. The transition to the LGA1718 Socket AM5 allows AMD to use next-generation I/O, including DDR5 memory, and PCI-Express Gen 5, both for the graphics card, and the M.2 NVMe slot attached to the CPU socket.
Much like Ryzen 3000 "Matisse," and Ryzen 5000 "Vermeer," the Ryzen 7000 "Raphael" desktop processor is a multi-chip module with up to two "Zen 4" CCDs (CPU core dies), and one I/O controller die. The CCDs are built on the 5 nm silicon fabrication process, while the I/O die is built on the 6 nm process, a significant upgrade from previous-generation I/O dies that were built on 12 nm. The leap to 5 nm for the CCD enables AMD to cram up to 16 "Zen 4" cores per socket, all of which are "performance" cores. The "Zen 4" CPU core is larger, on account of more number-crunching machinery to achieve the IPC increase and new instruction-sets, as well as the larger per-core L2 cache. The cIOD packs a pleasant surprise—an iGPU based on the RDNA2 graphics architecture! Now most Ryzen 7000 processors will pack integrated graphics, just like Intel Core desktop processors.
The Socket AM5 platform is capable of up to 24 PCI-Express 5.0 lanes from the processor. 16 of these are meant for the PCI-Express graphics slots (PEG), while four of these go toward an M.2 NVMe slot attached to the CPU—if you recall, Intel "Alder Lake" processors have 16 Gen 5 lanes toward PEG, but the CPU-attached NVMe slot runs at Gen 4. The processor features dual-channel DDR5 (four sub-channel) memory, identical to "Alder Lake," but with no DDR4 memory support. Unlike Intel, the AM5 Socket retains cooler compatibility with AM4, so the cooler you have sitting on your Ryzen CPU right now, will work perfectly fine.
The platform also puts out up to 14 USB 20 Gbps ports, including type-C. With onboard graphics now making it to most processor models, motherboards will feature up to four DisplayPort 2 or HDMI 2.1 ports. The company will also standardize Wi-Fi 6E + Bluetooth WLAN solutions it co-developed with MediaTek, weaning motherboard designers away from Intel-made WLAN solutions.
At its launch, in Fall 2022, AMD's AM5 platform will come with three motherboard chipset options—the AMD X670 Extreme (X670E), the AMD X670, and the AMD B650. The X670 Extreme was probably made by re-purposing the new-generation 6 nm cIOD die to work as a motherboard chipset, which means its 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes work toward building an "all Gen 5" motherboard platform. The X670 (non-extreme), is very likely a rebadged X570, which means you get up to 20 Gen 4 PCIe lanes from the chipset, while retaining PCIe Gen 5 PEG and CPU-attached NVMe connectivity. The B650 chipset is designed to offer Gen 4 PCIe PEG, Gen 5 CPU-attached NVMe, and likely Gen 3 connectivity from the chipset.
AMD is betting big on next-generation M.2 NVMe SSDs with PCI-Express Gen 5, and is gunning to be the first desktop platform with PCIe Gen 5-based M.2 slots. The company is said to be working with Phison to optimize the first round of Gen 5 SSDs for the platform.
All major motherboard vendors are ready with Socket AM5 motherboards. AMD showcased a handful, including the ASUS ROG Crosshair X670E Extreme, the ASRock X670E Taichi, MSI MEG X670E ACE, GIGABYTE X670E AORUS Xtreme, and the BIOSTAR X670E Valkyrie.
AMD is working to introduce several platform-level innovations like it did with Smart Access Memory with its Radeon RX 6000 series, which builds on top of the PCIe Resizable BAR technology by the PCI-SIG. The new AMD Smart Access Storage technology builds on Microsoft DirectStorage, by adding AMD platform-awareness, and optimization for AMD CPU and GPU architectures. DirectStorage enables direct transfers between a storage device and the GPU memory, without the data having to route through the CPU cores. In terms of power delivery Zen 4 uses the same SVI3 voltage control interface that we saw introduced on the Ryzen Mobile 6000 Series. For desktop this means the ability to address a higher number of VRM phases and to process voltage changes much faster than with SVI2 on AM4.
Taking a closer look at the AMD Footnotes, "RPL-001", we find out that the "15% IPC gain" figure is measured using Cinebench and compares a Ryzen 9 5950X processor (not 5800X3D), on a Socket AM4 platform with DDR4-3600 CL16 memory, to the new Zen 4 platform running at DDR5-6000 CL30 memory. If we go by the measurements from our Alder Lake DDR5 Performance Scaling article, then this memory difference alone will account for roughly 5% of the 15% gains.
The footnotes also reference a "RPL-003" claim that's not used anywhere in our pre-briefing slide deck, but shown in the video presentation. In the presentation we're seeing a live demo comparison between a "Ryzen 7000 Series" processor and Intel's Core i9-12900K "Alder Lake." It's worth mentioning here that AMD isn't disclosing the exact processor model, only that it's a 16-core part, if we follow the Zen 3 naming, that would probably be the Ryzen 9 7950X flagship. The comparison runs the Blender rendering software, which loads all CPU cores. Here we see the Ryzen 7000 chip finish the task in 204 seconds, compared to the i9-12900K and its 297 seconds time, which is a huge 31% difference—very impressive. It's worth mentioning that the memory configurations are slightly mismatched. Intel is running with DDR5-6000 CL30, whereas the Ryzen is tested with DDR5-6400 CL32—lower latency for Intel, higher MHz for Ryzen. While ideally we'd like to see identical memory used, the differences due to the memory configuration should be very small.
AMD is targeting a Fall 2022 launch for the Ryzen 7000 "Zen 4" desktop processor family, which would put this sometime between September thru October. The company is likely to detail the "Zen 4" microarchitecture and the Ryzen 7000 SKU list in the coming weeks.
Update 21:00 UTC: AMD has clarified that the 170 W PPT power numbers seen are the absolute max limits, not "typical" like the 105 W, on Zen 3, which were often exceeded during heavy usage.
Update May 26th: AMD further clarified that the 170 W number is "TDP", not "PPT", which means that when the usual x1.35 factor is applied, actual power usage can go up to 230 W.
You can watch the whole presentation again at YouTube:
Much like Ryzen 3000 "Matisse," and Ryzen 5000 "Vermeer," the Ryzen 7000 "Raphael" desktop processor is a multi-chip module with up to two "Zen 4" CCDs (CPU core dies), and one I/O controller die. The CCDs are built on the 5 nm silicon fabrication process, while the I/O die is built on the 6 nm process, a significant upgrade from previous-generation I/O dies that were built on 12 nm. The leap to 5 nm for the CCD enables AMD to cram up to 16 "Zen 4" cores per socket, all of which are "performance" cores. The "Zen 4" CPU core is larger, on account of more number-crunching machinery to achieve the IPC increase and new instruction-sets, as well as the larger per-core L2 cache. The cIOD packs a pleasant surprise—an iGPU based on the RDNA2 graphics architecture! Now most Ryzen 7000 processors will pack integrated graphics, just like Intel Core desktop processors.
At its launch, in Fall 2022, AMD's AM5 platform will come with three motherboard chipset options—the AMD X670 Extreme (X670E), the AMD X670, and the AMD B650. The X670 Extreme was probably made by re-purposing the new-generation 6 nm cIOD die to work as a motherboard chipset, which means its 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes work toward building an "all Gen 5" motherboard platform. The X670 (non-extreme), is very likely a rebadged X570, which means you get up to 20 Gen 4 PCIe lanes from the chipset, while retaining PCIe Gen 5 PEG and CPU-attached NVMe connectivity. The B650 chipset is designed to offer Gen 4 PCIe PEG, Gen 5 CPU-attached NVMe, and likely Gen 3 connectivity from the chipset.
AMD is working to introduce several platform-level innovations like it did with Smart Access Memory with its Radeon RX 6000 series, which builds on top of the PCIe Resizable BAR technology by the PCI-SIG. The new AMD Smart Access Storage technology builds on Microsoft DirectStorage, by adding AMD platform-awareness, and optimization for AMD CPU and GPU architectures. DirectStorage enables direct transfers between a storage device and the GPU memory, without the data having to route through the CPU cores. In terms of power delivery Zen 4 uses the same SVI3 voltage control interface that we saw introduced on the Ryzen Mobile 6000 Series. For desktop this means the ability to address a higher number of VRM phases and to process voltage changes much faster than with SVI2 on AM4.
Update 21:00 UTC: AMD has clarified that the 170 W PPT power numbers seen are the absolute max limits, not "typical" like the 105 W, on Zen 3, which were often exceeded during heavy usage.
Update May 26th: AMD further clarified that the 170 W number is "TDP", not "PPT", which means that when the usual x1.35 factor is applied, actual power usage can go up to 230 W.
You can watch the whole presentation again at YouTube:
211 Comments on AMD Unveils 5 nm Ryzen 7000 "Zen 4" Desktop Processors & AM5 DDR5 Platform
I would be OK with 5.5Ghz and a few vulnerabilities for another 10% IPC.
It is the other way around
If you treat the whole job as 1
Ryzen 7000 needs 204s to finish it make it 1/204 = 0.00490 jobs per second
12900k needs 297s to finish it = 1/297 = 0.00337 jobs per second
Take the zeros off
(490-337)/490 = 31% slower
(490-337)/337 = 45% Faster
So
12900k is 31% slower than the 16 core Ryzen 7000
Ryzen 7000 is 45% faster than the 12900k
It might sounds a little confused for the question when the data is presented with time and time is "Lower is better"
Therefore we need to convert them to"Higher is better"
For example
David needs 10s to run a 30m distance
Paul needs 20s
To find out "Who is faster" we need to divide and find the speed
Therefore it is 30/10 vs 30/20
So 3m/s vs 1.5m/s
So David runs 3m/s and he is 100% faster than Paul's 1.5m/s
Same situation applies to the test today.
angstronomics.substack.com/p/site-launch-exclusive-all-the-juicy
Unfortunately unless comparing identical workloads you can't compare at the same time both Intel/AMD choose what makes them looks best also them not talking about increases over the previous flagship is odd. Hopefully the comparison was made on a workload that the 5950X finishes in about the same time as the 12900k.
Which of course also means that Zen4c makes no sense in a low core count implementation, as the sacrifices made to afford higher core densities in HPC/server applications don't make any sense in that scenario, even if you would be able to clock them higher than in a dense server die.
Because 0.69 only means 0.69 or 69% , it doesn't mean 31%
Your equation doesn't work bothways since you need to decide when to put the 1 in front / after the answer (ie 1-0.69 or 1.45-1)
My equation is consistent
I suggest you check #87 to see how to calculate "Who is faster" which is a "bigger is better" scale.
The thing is
You need to calculate the "Speed" of the process.
Dividing both time doesn't give you the speed
"Distance / time" gives you the speed.
It is simple maths.
videocardz.com/newz/amd-confirms-its-am4-platform-will-continue-for-many-years-to-come
What you're doing here is attempting to redefine the base variable from "time elapsed" to "jobs performed". This is an explicit reversal of what was presented.....did you miss the part where I quoted that post directly? Also, that post entirely fails to explain this supposed point.You're confusing speed with rate. In this case, speed is time per job, rate is jobs per time.... there is no "distance" here, except metaphorically. But let's go with that metaphor: the "distance" is a single Blender render. That makes speed "how quickly do you finish one render?", not "how many renders/time are you capable of". The latter question asks for a rate, not a speed.Except that your maths fail to understand the questions being asked, and are thus being misapplied.Hm, that's indeed interesting. Though most likely she's just referring to the fact that the platform will be supported for quite a while yet - i.e. CPUs aren't being discontinued immediately, nor will AM4 be aimed at a full-stack replacement any time soon. I could also see OEMs and business partners continue making AM4-based products for low cost markets, entry business PCs, etc. that don't need the fast I/O or extreme performance of AM5 - especially given how AMD doesn't have Intel's massive chipset tier list with delineations of PCIe generations, DDR support, etc. Still, there's always the potential of that meaning 6nm AM4 refreshes (even if only for OEM markets) down the line, as that should be pretty cheap and easy for them to make.
Person A uses 100s to finish a job
Person B uses 200s
With YOUR equation
200/100 so B is 100% slower than A
100/200 so A is 50% faster than B
Your equation is fundamentally flawed because in your equation, A will NEVER be 100% faster than B becasue it has to be finished with 0 second to do that, in YOUR equation.
Please, use your common sense.
If a person finish his job in 10s when the other guy needs 200s, he is 20x faster than the other guy, but in YOUR equation, he is just 95% faster.
Even if the first person only needs 1s to finish the job, in YOUR equation he is just 99.5% faster.
In reality he is 200x faster
Comon it is simple Maths
eg I take a work cut - reduce to 4 days from 5 = 20% cut, but I get them back (4 days to 5) is a 25% increase!