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
The IF/IO Die has to be per-socket/memory type, and then they can use the IF link to whatever CCX dies they want to attach.
They could make an AM4 refresh with a new IO Die that's DDR4 specific and as compatible as possible with the existing one (same default max RAM speeds, default IF clocks, even if it potentially overclocks better) and mix in standard cores with newer ones.
On AM5 they just need to release a 8000 series CPU with one 8000x3D chipset and a 7000 series non-3D as the E-cores. Put in a somewhat conservative limit to keep them in the efficiency curve insteaf of the balls to the wall approach and you'd have 8 world-class gaming cores and upto 16 workhorse cores that are powerful and efficient at the same time, instead of being the mess E-cores presently are.
But its only an example, but I think its possible to get some "cheap" cores this way, with modified zen3 (on 7nm CCD)
AMD should release a CPU with 512 cores that all support AVX-1024 and use 65W of power peak, while each core has 128TB of L1 cache and supports EDO-RAM through GDDR6x and HBM2, and can use intel CPU's as drop in co-processors!
Theories are lovely. Wishes are lovely.
That doesn't mean they're remotely plausible, and some of your list would have added costs, complexity or caused bigger problems than they solved.
AMD "fights" on two fronts... Competing with Nvidia and Intel is not easy at all. They from AMD need to work very hard, launch not obvious things.
AMD nesds to do ''more of the same'', needs to do new things, have new thoughts, break old paradigms..
You cant sit there and come up with a list of things you'd totally have done better - it's fiction. You wrote a story of what you imagined, but then you're telling everyone that AMD are 'wrong' for not following your made up directives.
I'm not sure if you're young or just out of touch with how these things work.
Apperently nobody looks really how many cores a game really uses :D
The last part is a nice fantasy for the year 9524 as for the coming 10 years all cpu with more than 8 cores are kinda overkill for gaming
As more cores are only used if and only if your using heavy tasks like Video editing and CAD/CAM tasks
No do not answer if you disagree because i will not respond ever to nonsense
I got many gamer friends who asked me to build their game pc and they all are happy that i build it for them
The only important thing for gaming is the GPU some play games who are demanding and end up with the most expenssive GPU's from both competitors in the high performance sections but some are very very happy with my choice to put in a Intel card which actually are becoming very good cards for most players who are less demanding hardware wise.
So people come of your high horses and start looking at what you really need instead of putting your bragging needs as being reality.
Yes i have had people who wanted more and bought the most expenssive stuff and still hardly ever use it besides typing in "word and excel" which needs 2048 cores and 4096 GB of ram to mention some of the idiots that claim they need it, because they forget that a good IT man finds quickly what they actually really need :D, which is not bragging about something you REALLY never need
For those who don't know, AMD was much bigger than Nvidia in revenue, but, a few years ago, Nvidia became much bigger than AMD, and it wasn't with a conservative, outdated management.
No do not answer anything other as i will not respond nor believe anything which says otherwise.
Non of my system with 8/16 cores/threads which i owned showed ANY real usage on the so called more than 8 threads nothing at all, i do not count some system calls on one for a millisecond a real load.
Most games never show more than 4 to 6 cores really doing any REAL work, as almost all work is done by the gpu.
Every game i tested/played fantastic and funny enough the core speed actually never reach the so called 5 Ghz they are capable off it simply hovers around 4.5 up to 4.8 Ghz
I actually sold my 32 core machine to a video editing junk who was happy with it
So i hate it that AMD made the 32 core run faster than its smaller siblings as that is the real reason why these simply am faster in some games.
But AMD and Intel preffer to sell multi core nonsense to gamers as that makes more income for them.
The lower clocked 7800 X3D showed clearly that for gaming that is enough that the big gun uses a much higher clockspeed proves that a way too much core cpu needs a much higher clock speed to get almost the same result.
Do not talk about the VR nonsense as that will never be my cup of tea in the years i have left :D
usually the 1-2 threads for the 3D rendering get maxed out, then possibly one for AI, one for world generating (in games like minecraft) and beyond that you get low usage tasks for audio, networking, anti cheat etc
x3D chips cache the results - so if the game/task is asking the same math questions over and over, it has the result already and skips the work - lower cache chips do the entire task again every time.
LoL