Monday, May 15th 2023
AMD Ryzen 8000 "Granite Ridge" Zen 5 Processor to Max Out at 16 Cores
AMD's next-generation Ryzen 8000 "Granite Ridge" desktop processor based on the "Zen 5" microarchitecture, will continue to top out at 16-core/32-thread as the maximum CPU core-count possible, says a report by PC Games Hardware. The processor will retain the chiplet design of the current Ryzen 7000 "Raphael" processor, with two 8-core "Zen 5" CCDs, and one I/O die. It's very likely that AMD will reuse the same 6 nm client I/O die (cIOD) as "Raphael," just the way it used the same 12 nm cIOD between Ryzen 3000 "Matisse" and Ryzen 5000 "Vermeer;" but with updates that could enable higher DDR5 memory speeds. Each of the up to two "Eldora" Zen 5 CCDs has 8 CPU cores, with 1 MB of dedicated L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The CCDs are very likely to be built on the TSMC 3 nm EUV silicon fabrication process.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the PCGH leak would have to be the TDP numbers being mentioned, which continue to show higher-performance SKUs with 170 W TDP, and lower tiers with 65 W TDP. With its CPU core-counts not seeing increases, AMD would bank on not just the generational IPC increase of its "Zen 5" cores, but also max out performance within the power envelope of the new node, by dialing up clock speeds. AMD could ride out 2023 with its Ryzen 7000 "Zen 4" processors on the desktop platform, with "Granite Ridge" slated to enter production only by Q1-2024. The company could update its product stack in the meantime, perhaps even bring the 4 nm "Phoenix" monolithic APU silicon to the Socket AM5 desktop platform. Ryzen 8000 is expected to retain full compatibility with existing Socket AM5, and AMD 600-series chipset motherboards.
Sources:
VideoCardz, PC Games Hardware
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the PCGH leak would have to be the TDP numbers being mentioned, which continue to show higher-performance SKUs with 170 W TDP, and lower tiers with 65 W TDP. With its CPU core-counts not seeing increases, AMD would bank on not just the generational IPC increase of its "Zen 5" cores, but also max out performance within the power envelope of the new node, by dialing up clock speeds. AMD could ride out 2023 with its Ryzen 7000 "Zen 4" processors on the desktop platform, with "Granite Ridge" slated to enter production only by Q1-2024. The company could update its product stack in the meantime, perhaps even bring the 4 nm "Phoenix" monolithic APU silicon to the Socket AM5 desktop platform. Ryzen 8000 is expected to retain full compatibility with existing Socket AM5, and AMD 600-series chipset motherboards.
119 Comments on AMD Ryzen 8000 "Granite Ridge" Zen 5 Processor to Max Out at 16 Cores
I think amd can just attach extra 10/14nm cheap zen+/zen2, and call it a day. (cheap and simple)
Adding small "idle" cores to existing CCDs is weird.
On a single thread, Intel's E-Cores are close to SkyLake-S. Intel's Skylake S beats AMD's Bulldozer/Piledriver.
For Core i9 13900K, Intel is effectively gluing 8 Zen 4 class CPUs with non-SMT 16 Zen 1 class CPU cores.
Both Zen 1 and E-Cores have multiple 128-bit hardware units that double pump 256-bit AVX-2.
Intel Gracemont's six X86 decoder design is superior when compared to AMD's Bulldozer/Pipeliver.
It's a pretty good little CPU core since the entire hardware is allocated for a single thread. Bulldozer splits its hardware resource into two threads.
Intel Gracemount will beat both AMD Jaguar and Bulldozer designs.
Beating them is not some accomplishment.
12900K's E-Cores = 410
Ryzen 7 2700X (Zen 1.x) = 411
Intel i5 8400 = 411
Threadripper 1950X (Zen 1.x) = 411
The latest fat X86 CPU cores almost double E-Cores' 410.
www.cgdirector.com/cinebench-r20-scores-updated-results/
For Core i9 13900K, Intel effectively attached 16 Zen 1.0 cores (Threadripper 1950X) with 8-cores Zen 4.
To be fair Intel P cores are actually faster than AMD Zen 4 cores at same clock speed. LIke 6% better IPC per CInebench R23
And Intel i5 8400 is way better is latency sensitive workloads than Gracemont. Cinebench is not latency sensitive even though IPC is similar.
3950x and it's amazing... All they will do is raise the L1 cache in zen 5 and then wow the IPC gains are huge. And some minor architectural changes so the zen cores can communicate with the IOD faster and blah blah blah.... And we as fools will fall for this crap
For games,
AMD's X3D cache only shows the potential for Zen 4 cores when the memory latency issue is mitigated.
Core i9 13900K has 2 MB L2 cache per p-Core while Zen 4 has 1 MB L2 cache per core. Zen 5 has a 2 MB to 3 MB L2 cache per core. wccftech.com/amd-next-gen-zen-5-cpus-feature-reworked-cache-design-larger-l2-cache-per-core-rumor/
Intel has the higher near 6 Ghz p-Core clock speeds.I have Ryzen 9 3900X and 7900X, the 3900X is aging.
Zen 2 has two loads and one store.
Zen 3 has three loads and two stores.
From Zen 2 to Zen 4, the reorder order buffer is larger for each release.
Zen 2 CPU core's second thread has store starved situation I.e. Zen 2's SMT is less robust compared to newer x86 cores.
Zen 5 will be better than Zen 4 in IPC though in all workloads. Zen 5 is supposed to have 20-25% better IPC than Zen 4 so stands to reason will have 14-19% better IPC than Raptor Cove in non AVX512 workloads and AVX512 forget it as Raptor Cove does not support it.Are current e-cores at Zen 1 level at same clock speed? Cause I have heard they are like Skylake. Isn't Skylake IPC still better than Zen 1?
Freesync/Gsync make that redundant when used correctly
Since they can run 2x or 3x FPS boosted up, FPS caps can give you 120FPS at 240Hz, while 121FPS can only be 121Hz
You also get the large framebuffer benefits in that situation, so you get double the length of time for a frame to reach the monitor - so it smooths out microstutter greatly.
I'm eagerly awaitng the next gen 4K displays so i can get back to that level of goodness, vs my current heavily tweaked 60Hz displaypurely because AMD was beating them in multi threaded benchmarks, they call them E-cores when they're less efficient in every way than the P cores
On the conversation a few posts up:
12th gen E-cores had the efficiency of 10th gen intel/Zen2
RAM setup definitely helps them out, running four ranks and low timings seems key since they can rarely clock RAM up high
It all depends if that's enough for the user
AMD has made a number of blunders in recent years:
- didn't put RDNA1 iGPU in their latest APUs (kept insisting with old, inefficient and power hungry VEGA iGPUs until Ryzen 5000G)
- did not put support for DDR4 memory on Ryzen 7000
- did not put AV1 encoder on the iGPU of Ryzen 7000
- made the recent GPUs of RDNA3 cards in MCM scheme, which greatly increased the latencies and, thus, decreased the performance and, therefore, AMD had to increase the clock and consequently the electrical consumption of these GPUs so that they have competitive performance.
AMD needs to break old thinking and do at least the obvious:
- AMD must "sit down" with software developers (from HandBrake, Avidemux, Adobe, Cyberlink, MAGIX, Blackmagic Design, Apple, etc.) to get its video encoder (from their GPUs and iGPUs) to do the video conversion (in H.264, H.265 and AV1 codecs) in 2 steps. The first major chipmaker (Intel, AMD, Nvidia) to do this will sell chips like water in the desert...
- AMD's video encoder must achieve the same image quality as Nvidia's video encoder.
- Make only single-die GPUs so they have lower latencies and, thus, higher performance.
- All AM5 motherboards had to support BIOS update without the CPU in the socket. So people could buy AM5 motherboards without worrying about having to go through the hassle of building a PC and it not turning on because the motherboard's BIOS doesn't recognize the CPU.
- Need to launch single-die Ryzen CPUs (SoC) so they have higher performance. To launch CPUs with more than 8 cores, it would be enough to put chiplets together, as it already does today.
And my complain was more about the "naming" of cpu, when they call it 12Cores, and not 8P/4E
Video editing needs higher memory bandwidth and you argued for DDR4? DDR4 support is not important for AM5.
AMD backported RDNA 3 design on a 6 nm process node with the RX 7600.
RX 7900 XT/ XTX's GPU chip uses the 5 nm process node.
AMD's Phoenix APU uses the 4 nm process node which can support faster LPDDR5-7500 and RDNA 3 IGP. The tech for the IO chip upgrade is available from the Phoenix APU design.
RX 7900 XTX's TMU and TFLOPS are about AD103 level with ROPS being at AD102 level. Don't expect miracles.
AMD got blasted years ago for this with the FX CPU's and "misleading" core counts, yet intel can do it and its a positive.
They overclocked those E-cores far past their efficiency curve, and it ruined them.