Tuesday, August 27th 2024

AMD Threadripper 9000 "Shimada Peak" with 96 Zen 5 Cores Spotted

by
Nomad76
 Discuss (28 Comments)
A shipping manifest has revealed a new 96-core Ryzen Threadripper CPU codenamed "Shimada Peak." This processor is expected to incorporate Zen 5 CPU cores and maintain a configuration similar to AMD's current Zen 4 Threadripper flagship. The new CPU will likely be compatible with existing DDR5 HEDT motherboard platforms like TRX50 and WRX90. Its architecture appears to mirror that of AMD's previous 96-core Threadripper and EPYC models, featuring twelve 8-core CCDs and a single IO die. These similarities suggest that the primary change lies in the CCDs.

The Shimada Peak series is unlikely to debut in the near future. Given that the previous generation launched in October 2023 after a considerable delay, a similar timeline may apply here. AMD has remained silent regarding its Threadripper roadmap. Reports suggest AMD is preparing to unveil multiple products soon, the lineup is said to include the Ryzen AI 300 PRO, EPYC Turin, and Instinct MI325X. Following this, the next major showcase is expected to be CES. At this event, Kraken or Strix Halo are anticipated to make an appearance.

While Zen 5's gaming performance improvements have been modest, they have also shown significant gains in workstation and server applications. Phoronix benchmarks and our reviews highlight substantial performance boosts in Machine Learning, Database, HPC, and cryptography workloads compared to Zen 4. These improvements make Zen 5 Threadripper and EPYC CPUs appealing to specialized users.
Source: OC3D

Related News

Add your own comment

28 Comments on AMD Threadripper 9000 "Shimada Peak" with 96 Zen 5 Cores Spotted

#1
R0H1T
Wonder why they've moved on to peaks for TR & no Mount Fuji :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#4
R0H1T
It should be referring to this ~
www.britannica.com/place/Shimada
Which looks like somewhere close to Mount Fuji.

Probably, can't say for sure but "Shimada" is Japanese & just sounds like it.
Posted on Reply
#5
Sarajiel
unwind-protectWill this take registered or unbuffered RAM?
Almost certainly only reg. ECC DIMMs. It's most likely the same socket and I/O die as the Zen4 Threadrippers, just with Zen5 CCDs this time.
Posted on Reply
#6
Assimilator
unwind-protectWill this take registered or unbuffered RAM?
TRX50 and WRX90 require registered DIMMs because AMD has decided that consumers can't have affordable things.
Posted on Reply
#7
wNotyarD
AssimilatorTRX50 and WRX90 require registered DIMMs because AMD has decided that consumers can't have affordable things.
Were Threadrippers ever affordable?
Posted on Reply
#8
unwind-protect
AssimilatorTRX50 and WRX90 require registered DIMMs because AMD has decided that consumers can't have affordable things.
Well, on the bright side when it gets older registered ECC is cheaper than unbuffered.
Posted on Reply
#10
Makaveli
AssimilatorTRX50 and WRX90 require registered DIMMs because AMD has decided that consumers can't have affordable things.
They ditched HEDT TR after the Zen 2 models because there is more profit going OEM with the Pro models and selling directly to lenovo
Posted on Reply
#11
Mysteoa
It would probably need healing.
Posted on Reply
#12
Assimilator
wNotyarDWere Threadrippers ever affordable?
Compared to the newest models, absolutely.
Posted on Reply
#13
saphire
unwind-protectWill this take registered or unbuffered RAM?
TRX50 and WRX90 are both RDIMM.
Posted on Reply
#14
Jism
AssimilatorCompared to the newest models, absolutely.
Still - even on a budget you can assemble a beasty 16 core 32 thread Ryzen.

TR is for people who need them extra cores for a whole different reason. They are not designed to game on.
Posted on Reply
#15
Assimilator
JismThey are not designed to game on.
Last time I checked I didn't have to dick around with Microsoft Game Bar, running in Admin mode, and/or specific Windows versions to get games to run properly on my 3960X. Based on that I'd say TR is better designed to game on than Zen 5.

I didn't buy my current system because I wanted or needed 24 cores, I bought it because I needed 32 lanes of PCIe which is simply not an option on AMD's so-called consumer platform. That's literally the only reason - the IO. I didn't particularly want a 3960X with its age and heat output and ridiculous price tag, but AMD literally gave me no other choice except to go fuck myself. I'd have been perfectly satisfied with 8 cores but nope, if you want anything more than the meagre 28 lanes of PCIe that their so-called consumer platform puts out you have to buy HEDT.

Meanwhile back in socket 939 days, 32+ lanes of PCIe was the norm even on entry-level boards.
Posted on Reply
#16
Sarajiel
AssimilatorLast time I checked I didn't have to dick around with Microsoft Game Bar, running in Admin mode, and/or specific Windows versions to get games to run properly on my 3960X. Based on that I'd say TR is better designed to game on than Zen 5.
You should check out the Zen4 Threadripper reviews. Gaming isn't much fun on these anymore. o_O AMD turned TR into workstation CPUs for the corporate crowd. It's now, what "workstation epyc" should have been from the beginning.
AssimilatorI didn't buy my current system because I wanted or needed 24 cores, I bought it because I needed 32 lanes of PCIe which is simply not an option on AMD's so-called consumer platform.
Yeah, it's an absolute shame that there is nothing in between consumer and workstation options. 24 usable lanes is typically not enough for anyone who does more than gaming, and 80+ lanes is pretty much overkill for anyone who doesn't need multi-GPU support.
Posted on Reply
#17
Assimilator
SarajielYou should check out the Zen4 Threadripper reviews. Gaming isn't much fun on these anymore. o_O AMD turned TR into workstation CPUs for the corporate crowd. It's now, what "workstation epyc" should have been from the beginning.
Which is yet another reason why I DON'T WANT to buy a Threadripper! But I'm forced to.
SarajielYeah, it's an absolute shame that there is nothing in between consumer and workstation options. 24 usable lanes is typically not enough for anyone who does more than gaming, and 80+ lanes is pretty much overkill for anyone who doesn't need multi-GPU support.
It's not a shame, it's a god damn travesty. I'm not even asking for 32 lanes of PCIe 5, I would be quite satisfied if AMD made an AM5 chipset that outputs 16 lanes of PCIe 4 on top of the 28 (well, 24) lanes of PCIe 5 from the CPU. Promontory 21 offers up to 8 lanes of PCIe 4 when it's the secondary chipset (chained to another Prom21 i.e. X670E/X870E), all AMD needs to do is add 8 more lanes to that and spin it as "Promontory 22" and make X890E with Prom21 + Prom22 and I would be happier than a pig in shit. Assuming, of course, that board manufacturers would actually offer a second full-speed PCIe x16 slot instead of 22 billion M.2 slots THAT LITERALLY NOBODY WANTS OR NEEDS... give me my PCIe IO, you worthless bastards.

TBH I don't understand why AMD didn't just repurpose Zen 3's IO die design as the AM5 board chipset, instead of farming out an entirely new design to ASMedia (who has consistently failed to deliver these designs in a reasonable timeframe). I'm more and more coming to suspect that it was to intentionally screw over consumers.
Posted on Reply
#18
Arco
Eh Interesting, I'm in the weird spot where I want more than just four memory channels so either I have to pay for TR Pro or EYPC. Currently, EYPC is actually cheaper. :roll:

The 7980X is the same price as a 9684X and the comparable TR Pro models are like double that.
Posted on Reply
#19
unwind-protect
I'm waiting for 24 or 32 core desktop versions (still supporting unbuffered ECC). With the large memory modules now it is kind of bearable.
Posted on Reply
#20
igormp
AssimilatorLast time I checked I didn't have to dick around with Microsoft Game Bar, running in Admin mode, and/or specific Windows versions to get games to run properly on my 3960X. Based on that I'd say TR is better designed to game on than Zen 5.

I didn't buy my current system because I wanted or needed 24 cores, I bought it because I needed 32 lanes of PCIe which is simply not an option on AMD's so-called consumer platform. That's literally the only reason - the IO. I didn't particularly want a 3960X with its age and heat output and ridiculous price tag, but AMD literally gave me no other choice except to go fuck myself. I'd have been perfectly satisfied with 8 cores but nope, if you want anything more than the meagre 28 lanes of PCIe that their so-called consumer platform puts out you have to buy HEDT.

Meanwhile back in socket 939 days, 32+ lanes of PCIe was the norm even on entry-level boards.
Intel at least gives the option of buying into the platform with lower core-count models for their SR WS lineup, whereas AMD already starts up pretty expensive.
Posted on Reply
#21
efikkan
wNotyarDWere Threadrippers ever affordable?
Zen1 Threadrippers costed $549-999, Zen1+ costed $649-1799.
I was really excited when these launched back in the day and introduced some serious competition to the HEDT segment, but then AMD decided to push high core count CPUs to the mainstream and raising the entry point for Threadrippers, and with Intel followed with no direct successor to the great X299. And it's not like this was an advantage to any of us, as the higher-tier mainstream boards are costing "HEDT prices" anyways.

They both need to bring back proper HEDT, and with increasing demand for developers and content creators alike, people need fast CPUs with lots of memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes. Very high core count CPUs are on the other hand more for simulations and batch work than typical workstations.
Posted on Reply
#22
unwind-protect
igormpIntel at least gives the option of buying into the platform with lower core-count models for their SR WS lineup, whereas AMD already starts up pretty expensive.
AMD has low core count EPYC processors, though.
Posted on Reply
#23
Assimilator
efikkanZen1 Threadrippers costed $549-999, Zen1+ costed $649-1799.
I was really excited when these launched back in the day and introduced some serious competition to the HEDT segment, but then AMD decided to push high core count CPUs to the mainstream and raising the entry point for Threadrippers, and with Intel followed with no direct successor to the great X299. And it's not like this was an advantage to any of us, as the higher-tier mainstream boards are costing "HEDT prices" anyways.

They both need to bring back proper HEDT, and with increasing demand for developers and content creators alike, people need fast CPUs with lots of memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes. Very high core count CPUs are on the other hand more for simulations and batch work than typical workstations.
This. There has to be a middle ground between "actual server grade" and "consumer". People who want a lot of IO shouldn't be shut out.
unwind-protectAMD has low core count EPYC processors, though.
But those require registered ECC. Which is slower, rarer, and thus far more expensive than the standard desktop memory that I already have from my previous build and would really really like to reuse so that I don't have to fork out even more money.
Posted on Reply
#24
igormp
unwind-protectAMD has low core count EPYC processors, though.
Aren't those on a different socket from the TRs?
They also do have those rebranded Ryzens that fall under the Epyc 4004 branding, but I don't think those are relevant at all.
Posted on Reply
#25
unwind-protect
igormpAren't those on a different socket from the TRs?
Yes they are.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 21st, 2024 05:00 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts