AMD Roadmaps Next-gen Ryzen "Strix Point" CPUs at AI PC Summit

[T0@st]

Dr. Lisa Su introduced AMD's "next-gen AMD Ryzen" processor series during a recent presentation at the Beijing AI PC Innovation Summit—this announcement confirms that Team Red's RDNA 3+ (AKA 3.5) graphics technology is destined to arrive (on board) with the launch of "Strix Point" processors. Product roadmaps remain unchanged—when compared to slides from last December—AMD still anticipates a 2024 launch window. China has been introduced to current-gen "Hawk Point" Ryzen 8040 mobile and 8000G (AM5) desktop processors—key AMD personnel presented a variety of products, including region-specific budget options.

David Wang, SVP of GPU Technology and Engineering R&D, covered the RDNA 3+ and XDNA 2 architectures (very briefly) during his on-stage appearance—he dedicated most of his attention to current-gen "Hawk Point" processors. The Strix Point integrated solution—a GFX1150 target—has been linked to "RDNA 3.5" for a while, a lot of this information was gleaned from publicly visible AMD patch notices. The latest Team Red software engineering activities indicate that Zen 5 CPU enablement is nearing a possible finish line.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[bonehead123]

Earlier this week, we got to listen to Da Jacket Man rambling on about growing/dominating his AI empire with his GPU's (gee, what a surprise), now his little sista trying to steal his thundr with her upcoming CPU's....wOw, what a week it has been

 

[mama]

What's this about RDNA 3+? I think I've missed something here. Or is this just the APU iteration?

 

[ARF]

Or is this just the APU iteration?

No.

What's this about RDNA 3+? I think I've missed something here.

This is the big news today. It means awful news for AMD. Instead of pulling RDNA 4 forward, this roadmap update confirms that RDNA 4 is not ready and will not be ready till at least 2025.

This means that AMD will have an extremely difficult year, and the graphics cards problems won't be fixed.
Awful ray-tracing performance, extremely high power consumption, very low Counter - Strike 2 performance, to name a few.

 

[springs113]

No.



This is the big news today. It means awful news for AMD. Instead of pulling RDNA 4 forward, this roadmap update confirms that RDNA 4 is not ready and will not be ready till at least 2025.

This means that AMD will have an extremely difficult year, and the graphics cards problems won't be fixed.
Awful ray-tracing performance, extremely high power consumption, very low Counter - Strike 2 performance, to name a few.

I need the mega millions winning numbers.

 

[SL2]

This is the big news today. It means awful news for AMD. Instead of pulling RDNA 4 forward, this roadmap update confirms that RDNA 4 is not ready and will not be ready till at least 2025.

This means that AMD will have an extremely difficult year, and the graphics cards problems won't be fixed.

It doesn't mean shit for graphics cards. This is for APU's only.

This an APU, and APU's have always been lagging behind graphics cards when it comes to graphics generation. I for one never expected the next APU to be RDNA 4, especially since rumors said something else for almost a year now.

 

[Minus Infinity]

No.



This is the big news today. It means awful news for AMD. Instead of pulling RDNA 4 forward, this roadmap update confirms that RDNA 4 is not ready and will not be ready till at least 2025.

This means that AMD will have an extremely difficult year, and the graphics cards problems won't be fixed.
Awful ray-tracing performance, extremely high power consumption, very low Counter - Strike 2 performance, to name a few.

Nope doesn't mean that at all. At no point was Strix going to get RDNA4, never ever. RDNA 4 N44 and N48 are on track for desktop Q3 release so far.

Strix iGPU will be way more powerful if for no other reason than having up tpo 12 CU's vs 8 CU's currently and then there's Sarlak to come. RDNA nodes in iGPU have always lagged a long way behind desktop releases. Strix's successor is to get RDNA4.

 

[Zubasa]

What's this about RDNA 3+? I think I've missed something here. Or is this just the APU iteration?

Yes. All the recent APUs are named after birds, Strix is Latin for Owl. The previous ones are Phoneix.

Strix iGPU will be way more powerful if for no other reason than having up tpo 12 CU's vs 8 CU's currently and then there's Sarlak to come. RDNA nodes in iGPU have always lagged a long way behind desktop releases. Strix's successor is to get RDNA4.

It goes to 16CU RDNA3+ from 12CUs RDNA3 that Phoenix has. Even the Zen3+ APUs already has 12 RDNA2 CUs.

 

[Minus Infinity]

It goes to 16CU RDNA3+ from 12CUs RDNA3 that Phoenix has. Even the Zen3+ APUs already has 12 RDNA2 CUs.

Ah I was thinking Vega I guess.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

Words CANNOT express how excited I am for the alleged 40CU APU!!!! I have always wanted an APU with the CU count of a console and now there's finally hope. If this thing can do 1080p @ 60fps on high settings it will seriously be a watershed moment.

I believe this next gen of powerful APUs will be one of the first serious threats Nvidia has faced in recent years and it'll be at their "entry level" (in performance, but not price) offerings.

 

[Tek-Check]

Strix iGPU will be way more powerful if for no other reason than having up tpo 12 CU's vs 8 CU's currently

Current APUs Phoenix and Hawk Point have 12CUs on top models.
Strix will have 16CUs and Strix Halo should receive up to 40CUs.

It means awful news for AMD. Instead of pulling RDNA 4 forward, this roadmap update confirms that RDNA 4 is not ready and will not be ready till at least 2025.

This means that AMD will have an extremely difficult year, and the graphics cards problems won't be fixed.
Awful ray-tracing performance, extremely high power consumption, very low Counter - Strike 2 performance, to name a few.

What is this pile of nonsense about?

 

[evernessince]

This is the big news today. It means awful news for AMD. Instead of pulling RDNA 4 forward, this roadmap update confirms that RDNA 4 is not ready and will not be ready till at least 2025.

This means that AMD will have an extremely difficult year, and the graphics cards problems won't be fixed.
Awful ray-tracing performance, extremely high power consumption, very low Counter - Strike 2 performance, to name a few.

The only thing confirmed here is that you aren't aware that it's pretty typical for AMD's APU / iGPU to trail behind a generation or two.

This has no implications on AMD's RDNA4.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

have always wanted an APU with the CU count of a console and now there's finally hope.

There left some questions about iGPU memory bandwidth because sharing of RAM with CPU part, latency, consumption, cooling... price, availability.

 

[Tek-Check]

There left some questions about iGPU memory bandwidth because sharing of RAM with CPU part, latency, consumption, cooling... price, availability.

I am sure it will game better than Apple's laptops, despite obvious constraints.

 

[SL2]

I am sure it will game better than Apple's laptops, despite obvious constraints.

Sure

 

[Tek-Check]

Sure
View attachment 340834

Bravo! You found it. And now..., shall we clap?
- 780M APU gets 30 fps with 8 core CPU, 12 GPU compute units and for ~$700 in any decent mini-PC or laptop under ~$1,000
- M3 Max gets 80 fps with 16 core CPU and 40 GPU cores, on 3nm node and minimum 48GB RAM, if not more, for, wait for it..., from $4,000
So, 2.66 times more performance with 3.33 times more GPU cores in this game, 4-5 times more expensive. Amazing? What can I say.
- M3 Pro gets 39 fps with 11 core CPU and 14 GPU cores. That is more comparable. 30% more performance with 17% more GPU and 37% more CPU
- don't forget that 780M is almost one year older iGPU.

In 'High', the difference is much smaller: 87 fps vs 44 fps, but still this is 40 cores vs 12 compute units.
You found an elephant to compare with a mouse.

Just imagine what Strix Halo APU could achieve next year with 16 CPU cores and 40 GPU compute units. We can come back to this discussion next year.

 

[SL2]

Bravo! You found it. And now..., shall we clap?
- 780M APU gets 30 fps with 8 core CPU, 12 GPU compute units and for ~$700 in any decent mini-PC or laptop under ~$1,000
- M3 Max gets 80 fps with 16 core CPU and 40 GPU cores, on 3nm node and minimum 48GB RAM,
So, 2.66 times more performance with 3.33 times more GPU cores in this game, 4-5 times more expensive.

Yes, give me my medal. At least I had a single benchmark to back up my claim, unlike you.

I'm showing how wrong you are, and you try to flip it, telling me I'm making a bad comparison?

Last post you said AMD will do better in games, despite they're not even close to Apple right now. How did you come to that conclusion? Didn't your user name tell you anything?
(Price is a big concern, sure, but you were specifically talking about game performance.)

Now you're trying to backtrack by talking about cost instead. Or do you think future AMD laptops will have Apple price tags, making the comparison fair?

You found an elephant to compare with a mouse.

No.
You started it:

I am sure it will game better than Apple's laptops, despite obvious constraints.

You deserve all the credit for that comparison!

Let's face it, there's nothing that says AMD's APU's will beat Apples chips, simply becuse they're not in the same price segment. You might as well throw in a few Nvidia GPU's in the mix..

wait for it...,

What a cool expression!

 

[Tek-Check]

Let's face it, there's nothing that says AMD's APU's will beat Apples chips

There is everything to say that Strix architecture will be very competitive, indeed. The article is about incoming Strix APUs.
There will be two segments:
1. Strix Point for mainstream, with up to 12 cores and 16 graphics CUs - to compete with M3 vanilla and Pro SKUs, as well as Arrow Lake CPUs
2. Strix Halo for enthusiasts, with up to 16 cores and 40 graphics CUs - to compete with M3 Max SKUs; Intel does not have this segment now.
Pretty simple.

Apple chips perform better at the moment simply because they have new products released a few months ago.
Intel, AMD, Apple and Qualcomm have their own timeline for releasing products and it will be very competitive towards the end of the year.
Qualcomm CPU preliminary benchmarks already show those chips are very competitive against Apple M3 CPUs.

You started it:

Sure, but at least give us more meaningful comparison from similar market segment and not with halo M3 Max that costs $4,000. Nonsense.
It's like shooting from bazooka into insects.

 

[SL2]

There is everything to say that Strix architecture will be very competitive, indeed.

With Apples graphics being that much faster right now, there's nothing telling me that they won't improve from this point. Strix Halo won't be competing with M3.

Still, you are sure that AMD will be faster, that's not a given to me.

Sure, but at least give us more meaningful comparison from similar market segment and not with halo M3 Max that costs $4,000.

Stop making up prices, M2 Max starts at $2000, and $3200 for M3 Max. Graphics performance is about the same.

I was just showing what AMD is up against, I'm not saying that customers are seriously choosing between Hawk Point and M3 Max. That's all in your mind.

 

[Tek-Check]

Stop making up prices, M2 Max starts at $2000, and $3200 for M3 Max. Graphics performance is about the same.

You never mentioned anything M2, so why mention it now suddenly.
Better check Apple store instead of telling me that I make up prices.
The SKU you mentioned in the benchmark is $4,000, with minimal amount of memory and storage, it should be said.

 

[SL2]

You never mentioned anything M2, so why mention it now suddenly.

I never mentioned M2 or M3 specifically before last post, that was you. You're mixing up my posts with your own lol. Get some rest.

That's 2200 USD.

 

[Tek-Check]

Get some rest.

I am well rested, thank you.
If you are providing M2 prices, then have decency to provide comparable M2 benchmarks in wide array of games, rather than cherry-picking one title.

 

[SL2]

If you are providing M2 prices, then have decency to provide comparable M2 benchmarks in wide array of games, rather than cherry-picking one title.

You know all about decency, do you?

Bravo! You found it. And now..., shall we clap?

Impressive.

I've posted one benchmark, the one I found at the moment. You're clutching at straws here, the only thing you're bringing is weird attitude lol.

You started this comparison, but you won't accept the consequences of it, i.e two future computers with the best integrated graphics from AMD and Apple will never cost the same, not even close, so in terms of cost the comparison will be unfair, tho not as much as right now.

Again, I only wanted to show what AMD is up against in terms of performance, I never said they can't match it or beat it. Cost will always be different, and I think you know that about Apple.

 

[Tek-Check]

Again, I only wanted to show what AMD is up against in terms of performance, I never said they can't match it or beat it. Cost will always be different, and I think you know that about Apple.

All good. Companies should be challenged to bring competitive products. AMD is challenged here by new gen of M3 chips and they are preparing two new Strix segments to meet this challenge, one in mainstream and one for halo users. I am simply optimistic that Strix chips will meet the challenge.
Happy Easter!