AMD Introduces Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 Mobile Processors with "Zen 4c" Cores

[Squared]

E-cores are just SkyLake-based compute cores that have been incorporated into the hybrid INTEL architecture. The argument is mute because the difference between a Performance and Efficient core isn't that big to dismiss what AMD is doing in a similar nature.

Intel's E-cores aren't related to Skylake. Gracemont was compared to Skylake by Intel and reviewers when Alder Lake came out because it's almost as performant as Skylake.

The lineage of Intel and AMD's cores is probably why Intel has a dedicated E-core architecture and AMD does not. Bulldozer, Saltwell, Sandy Bridge, and Bobcat; long ago the four CPU microarchitectures lived together in harmony. But everything changed when Sandy Bridge came to market. Bobcat was AMD's first generation little core, the second generation was Jaguar. But when the time came for a third generation AMD had a tiny development budget and the Bulldozer line was going into cheaper and cheaper devices, so the last microarchitecture in its line, Excavator, was actually lean enough to replace the Bobcat line, which AMD did with the release of the Stony Ridge APU.

Since then AMD's Zen line has always had to fill the needs of every CPU AMD sells. But Intel has been updating their little microarchitecture this whole time, so Intel has the flexibility to use both big and little cores. In fact I think the big and little cores Intel used in Lakefield were probably in development before Intel decided to make Lakefield. AMD has only one core today but the density-optimized layout reminds me of Excavator, so AMD's fastest way to make a little core was to density-optimize Zen 4. The fact that TSMC makes AMD processors and ARM processors probably means that AMD has access to better density-optimizing tools than Intel does.

But this could all change tomorrow. Intel is building processors for ARM customers, so Intel has to be investing into better density-optimizing tools. And AMD has more than enough money to build dedicated big and little cores. In the future their approach to big and little cores may look more alike the other.

 

[Dr. Dro]

E-cores are just SkyLake-based compute cores that have been incorporated into the hybrid INTEL architecture. The argument is mute because the difference between a Performance and Efficient core isn't that big to dismiss what AMD is doing in a similar nature.

Although they perform similarly to Skylake, they are not derived from it or any other type of Core architecture. Gracemont is derived from the Atom family of architectures.

The difference in performance between P and E cores on Raptor Lake is rather massive

 

[R0H1T]

Bulldozer, Saltwell, Sandy Bridge, and Bobcat; long ago the four CPU microarchitectures lived together in harmony.

That almost sounds like an intro to Kungfu Panda

 

[Squared]

That almost sounds like an intro to Kungfu Panda

I hadn't thought of that; yeah it fits. But I was going for The Last Airbender.

 

[ADB1979]

The slide is highly questionable or just flat out wrong. Half of those are irrelevant (all cores can have smt, who cares?) or just plainly lying. E cores don't improve gaming? Really? lol...

This is nothing more than AMD taking the piss out of Intel and their literal two different types of cores that have literal different capabilities.

This is a singular part of marketing, AMD is now doing to Intel exactly as Intel has previously done to AMD. all is fair in love and war...

Also E cores are die-area efficient.

Please compare AMD Zen 4e cores to intel "E cores" for die efficiency.! Note that I did not specify the manufacturing node as that is highly important. You can look at many sources that compare die size on various nodes, the Intel E-cores ALWAYS lose, on literally every worthwhile metric, die space/performance, performance/power etc, and lets not forget what the E-cores cannot do, AVX-512. Who wins, ARM or AMD, until Intel (hopefully) gets back to being competitive.