AMD Announces 2nd Gen Ryzen Quad-core and Energy-Efficient Processor Models

[bug]

Why would they? Can you name a situation when 45W 8-core desktop chip makes sense?

It really looks like AMD is out of ideas at this point and just making all CPUs they can out of the Zen parts lying around...

For OEMs it never needs to make sense. It just needs to put out some numbers they can sell

 

[btarunr]

Most people like their thin clients with video output.

Pretty sure thin-clients are fine with $50 Celerons.

 

[john_]

AMD need to release those 45W part in retail. OEM will not put them in proper system

Indeed. But OEMs will love them. Smaller coolers, less noise, smaller power consumption, smaller PSUs, all the marketing.

 

[Frick]

Indeed. But OEMs will love them. Smaller coolers, less noise, smaller power consumption, smaller PSUs, all the marketing.

The lack of an IGP is a real drawback there tbh.

 

[noname00]

I'm curious how the memory is connected to the CPU for the 2300x and the 2500x. If both channels are connected to the same die, we might not see the same performance improvement by using faster memory, and those processors might have some performance unlocked with low performance memory (2400 and 2666)

 

[bug]

I'm curious how the memory is connected to the CPU for the 2300x and the 2500x. If both channels are connected to the same die, we might not see the same performance improvement by using faster memory, and those processors might have some performance unlocked with low performance memory (2400 and 2666)

Yes, if you don't use IF, IF doesn't need faster memory to work better. That is a given.

 

[laszlo]

Why would they? Can you name a situation when 45W 8-core desktop chip makes sense?

It really looks like AMD is out of ideas at this point and just making all CPUs they can out of the Zen parts lying around...

i totally agree with you! a 45 w chip make no sense! the fx-8120 with min 150w is the way to go!

 

[bug]

i totally agree with you! a 45 w chip make no sense! the fx-8120 with min 150w is the way to go!

The implication is when you need that many cores, being constrained to 45W tends to work against you. Not that chips should be as power hungry as possible.
Fwiw, Intel has also had 4c/8t low power CPUs for quite some time (though only one per generation). Those don't make better sense either.

 

[notb]

Pretty sure thin-clients are fine with $50 Celerons.

I don't understand this answer. Care to explain?

i totally agree with you! a 45 w chip make no sense! the fx-8120 with min 150w is the way to go!

The thesis is not that 45W CPUs make no sense in general, but that it's difficult to name a scenario, where this particular chip makes sense.

Good thing the target probably isn't thin clients then.

So what is? I'm really curious.

 

[laszlo]

The thesis is not that 45W CPUs make no sense in general, but that it's difficult to name a scenario, where this particular chip makes sense.

So what is? I'm really curious.

in my humble opinion you don't need any scenario to fit a cpu somewhere especially when tendency is to lower tdp with smaller fab. nodes

what is wrong having a low tdp chip which can be used for desktop and laptop ?

 

[john_]

The lack of an IGP is a real drawback there tbh.

Yes that could make it the perfect chip. On the other hand they can throw a low wattage Nvidia/AMD there and have a really nice package that can be promoted for both work and games.

 

[dj-electric]

I dont like how non-competitive these are. At all.
These could to to retail for 90$ and 130$ and crush some competition

 

[bug]

in my humble opinion you don't need any scenario to fit a cpu somewhere especially when tendency is to lower tdp with smaller fab. nodes

what is wrong having a low tdp chip which can be used for desktop and laptop ?

The fact that is will throttle under any significant load, thus performing probably worse than a 4c/4t running at higher frequencies maybe?

 

[Frick]

I don't understand this answer. Care to explain?

The thesis is not that 45W CPUs make no sense in general, but that it's difficult to name a scenario, where this particular chip makes sense.

So what is? I'm really curious.

Really low power CPUs. Historically thin clients have been the home of embedded CPUs. Geode, Intel Atoms and the like with a TDP of maybe 5W or so. Anything else is wasted on a thin client, as they're not supposed to do any work on their own.

USFF systems is a whole other thing and there the lack of IGPs is definitely a hinderance.

Yes that could make it the perfect chip. On the other hand they can throw a low wattage Nvidia/AMD there and have a really nice package that can be promoted for both work and games.

They shouldn't have to do that. This plus the weak Vega in the newly announced Athlon would be a good fit. In desktops it's not a problem, but it is for USFF systems where you don't want extra chips producing heat.

 

[notb]

The implication is when you need that many cores, being constrained to 45W tends to work against you. Not that chips should be as power hungry as possible.

IMO it's even worse. Infinity Fabric is fairly power hungry, which is then offset by fairly frugal cores. So in general, Zen power consumption scales favorably with performance.

Assuming Infinity Fabric draws 15-20W and this CPU is really 45W, it leaves awfully little for the cores. So either:
1) cores are really slow, despite the attractive 2.8GHz (how?)
2) they've seriously dialed down IF performance

Fwiw, Intel has also had 4c/8t low power CPUs for quite some time (though only one per generation). Those don't make better sense either.

They make sense thanks to IGP. I've seen many AIO powered by i7-6700T.

OK. Few minutes googling and I've found a possible use. Gaming mini-PCs (like Alienware SteamMachine). They have a dGPU and they may still benefit from a low-power CPU.
AMD surely can take some market share in this niche, but it's way too small to make these CPUs sensible. They'll need to sell more.

 

[Vya Domus]

I dont like how non-competitive these are. At all.
These could to to retail for 90$ and 130$ and crush some competition

130$ for a an 8c/16t part (be it a low power variant) ? AMD may be the budget sensible choice but they aren't a charity and they shouldn't undercut their competitor by that much.

Also, there is no competition for them to crush to begin with. Intel does not have a comparable product.

 

[bug]

IMO it's even worse. Infinity Matrix is fairly power hungry, which is then offset by fairly frugal cores. So in general, Zen power consumption scales favorably with performance.

Assuming Infinity Matrix draws 15-20W and this CPU is really 45W, it leaves awfully little for the cores. So either:
1) cores are really slow, despite the attractive 2.8GHz (how?)
2) they've seriously dialed down IF performance

These are single CCX (unlike first-gen Zens), IF is not used here.
They make sense thanks to IGP. I've seen many AIO powered by i7-6700T.

OK. Few minutes googling and I've found a possible use. Gaming mini-PCs (like Alienware SteamMachine). They have a dGPU and they may still benefit from a low-power CPU.
AMD surely can take some market share in this niche, but it's way too small to make these CPUs sensible. They'll need to sell more.

That is only true is these can keep those 4GHz up with load on 4 cores. Which is unknown atm, but afaik boost clocks don't tend to mean the frequency with half the cores under load.

It doesn't really matter, these don't makes sense for tech-savvy users, but at the same time, they are not sold to tech-savvy users. They'll server their purpose. It's not like they're slow CPU. It's just that when you know your workflow and do a bit of research, there are options to build a better system overall.

 

[dj-electric]

130$ for a an 8c/16t part (be it a low power variant) ? AMD may be the budget sensible choice but they aren't a charity and they shouldn't undercut their competitor by that much.

Also, there is no competition for them to crush to begin with. Intel does not have a comparable product.

130$ for a 4C\8T part. Was referring the 2500X
Intel is still reaping sales with its i3. That market needs disruption, a serious one.

 

[R0H1T]

The lack of an IGP is a real drawback there tbh.

I think we'll see 2nd gen RR address that, hopefully before Zen2 launches ~ which could be 6/12 months from now.

 

[notb]

Really low power CPUs. Historically thin clients have been the home of embedded CPUs. Geode, Intel Atoms and the like with a TDP of maybe 5W or so. Anything else is wasted on a thin client, as they're not supposed to do any work on their own.

Well... thin client is supposed to just run a bare OS and a remote desktop client. It dates back to a time where your "client" usually connected to some system (computational, database etc) rather than to a general purpose OS.
Reality is somehow different today. For example where I work, the data and analytical software is indeed accessed remotely via RDP. But you still use your PC for everything that needs Internet access (since it's blocked in the remote environment), so an i3 / i5 is welcome.
However, some people in the office use SAS and they have i7s.

These are single CCX (unlike first-gen Zens), IF is not used here.

I meant the 6- and 8-core ones.
And BTW: the single-CCX Ryzens also use IF - it's responsible for the whole I/O (including RAM).

That is only true is these can keep those 4GHz up with load on 4 cores. Which is unknown atm, but afaik boost clocks don't tend to mean the frequency with half the cores under load.

Well... the 45W does seem unrealistic compared to normal Ryzen 7. Some tuning is likely being done to keep the power consumption down.

It doesn't really matter, these don't makes sense for tech-savvy users, but at the same time, they are not sold to tech-savvy users.

I'd love to learn your definition of "tech-savvy". :-D
Also, does it mean tech-savvy people should be compelled to custom-build their PCs from expensive parts and overclock the hell out of them?

To be honest, I don't know if you're against OEMs or low-power CPUs. ;-)

They'll server their purpose. It's not like they're slow CPU.

I'm not saying they're slow. I'm saying they're useless.

It's just that when you know your workflow and do a bit of research, there are options to build a better system overall.

So now you're suggesting OEM buyers don't know their workflow? What's happening here? :-o

 

[silentbogo]

Most people like their thin clients with video output.

I highly doubt those will go into thin clients or conventional low-power applications. That's what the new Athlon 200GE and upcoming LP APUs are probably for (and even then those are too power-hungry).
This will probably go into a high-performance workstation or maybe a server lineup targeted at small business segment.
If I remember correctly, QNAP already announced a series of Ryzen-powered NAS appliances.

 

[bug]

@notb I meant off-the shelf designs tend to be rather unbalanced. In order to meet a lower price points, the OEM almost always cuts a corner you wouldn't want cut.
By tech-savvy I mean someone who knows what each part of a computer does and how to build a system without unnecessary bottlenecks. Non tech-savvy would be someone who walks into a store and asks for a computer that can browser the internet and play games.

Also, fair point about IF. But I think IF's speed is only an issue when moving data between CCXs. It can't be an issue when connecting the CCX to the RAM (that's always limited by the RAM speed, and even that is partly mitigated by caches) and other I/O is slower than RAM access.

 

[HD64G]

Not bad power consumption at all imho. Ryzen proves that it can be absolutely versatile arch, from the new Athlon, to the APUs, to the 8c/16T and up to the monstrous 2990WX. Good job there engineers. Remains to be proved if it was GF's 14nm production problem that they didn't clock high enough or something in its core design. Eventhough, they had enough time by now to have solved it if ever existed. 7nm will show up the full potential of the original design. Just imagine 16c/32T in a 95W package that can be intalled in B350 or X370 motherboards.

 

[bug]

Not bad power consumption at all imho. Ryzen proves that it can be absolutely versatile arch, from the new Athlon, to the APUs, to the 8c/16T and up to the monstrous 2990WX. Good job there engineers. Remains to be proved if it was GF's 14nm production problem that they didn't clock high enough or something in its core design. Eventhough, they had enough time by now to have solved it if ever existed. 7nm will show up the full potential of the original design. Just imagine 16c/32T in a 95W package that can be intalled in B350 or X370 motherboards.

... to play games that use 4-6 cores

 

[Frick]

Reality is somehow different today. For example where I work, the data and analytical software is indeed accessed remotely via RDP. But you still use your PC for everything that needs Internet access (since it's blocked in the remote environment), so an i3 / i5 is welcome.
However, some people in the office use SAS and they have i7s.

Yeah. But those aren't thin clients.