AMD May Have Ryzen 16-Core Version and New Chipset in the Works for June

[theGryphon]

Meanwhile, an i3 can be easily overclocked to 5,3 Ghz... although this is only much better for gaming, but still.

Post about i3 when the news is about 16-core processors...

 

[theGryphon]

I saw someone doing it and the difference was quite high, ~10-15 fps in a high fps scenario of over 120 fps in a modern game. Now just to find that source and exact info again ....

edit:
I found this at least, not really the source I was speaking of but better than nothing:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-ryzen-cores&num=2

While there are some weird bench results there, when you look at the ones that behave normally (proper scaling or plateauing with increased number of cores) one can see that there is virtually no difference between 2+2 and 4+0, which to me is great news!

 

[Aquinus]

I bet it's going to be an Opteron.

Honestly, assuming this is going to a special HEDT platform (which AMD almost never does,) is kind of wishful thinking. I would be very surprised if they did this.

 

[eidairaman1]

Just Ignore @PowerPC he sounds like Cvrk. (Troll/Village +01Di).

Post about i3 when the news is about 16-core processors...

 

[jaggerwild]

WOO HOO!!!
More ZEN HYPE

 

[RejZoR]

AMD should fork a 4c/8t processor (one CCX unit), use different fab that is high clock focused and "unlock" the TDP to 120W. That would perfectly counter 7700K. But apparently they weren't concerned about the clock difference...

 

[Brusfantomet]

AMD should fork a 4c/8t processor (one CCX unit), use different fab that is high clock focused and "unlock" the TDP to 120W. That would perfectly counter 7700K. But apparently they weren't concerned about the clock difference...

Well, i do not know about the 120W TDP but add a gpu and you have the APUs that are coming to AM4

 

[Gasaraki]

Why? How is this going to help performance? Do we need 16 cores with HT? Really? How about getting your DDR4 past 3000+ with more than 2 sticks? How about getting true 8 core without the CCX bullshit? How about getting speed past 4.0GHz? How about getting XFR to function they way they should function instead of just 100MHz boost? Let's stick with the basics AMD. Learn to walk again before you try running.

 

[Camm]

Why? How is this going to help performance? Do we need 16 cores with HT? Really? How about getting your DDR4 past 3000+ with more than 2 sticks? How about getting true 8 core without the CCX bullshit? How about getting speed past 4.0GHz? How about getting XFR to function they way they should function instead of just 100MHz boost? Let's stick with the basics AMD. Learn to walk again before you try running.

Posts like this annoy me, as you simply have ignored why AMD has taken certain design decisions.

Do we need 16 cores? No, but wouldn't you prefer to have the option? Personally, because the chip is split into CCX units, the usual mhz scaling problems that affect higher core count chips have the potential to not be a problem. So thats rather exciting IMO.

DDR4 has already hit 3400mhz in testing. You also ignore that AMD's memory subsystem is unified, so simply 'cranking' memory speed is a more involved process.

XFR is limited to that boost as AMD is at the top of its manufacturing process. Its somewhat unfortunate, but Samsungs 14nm LPP node, whilst fricking amazing in the right envelope (1700 8 Core for 65w anyone? amazing efficiency all things considered), AMD's having to reach into the top end of it to deliver performance in consumer lines. AMD probably needs a different node for high end desktop and GPU, but alas thats a degree of cost that I don't think AMD could bare (and misses the fact that AMD is clearly targeting mobility, professional and server markets over consumers). That being said, I know of no one who would have any real reason to complain about an octocore at 4Ghz.

 

[Kanan]

While there are some weird bench results there, when you look at the ones that behave normally (proper scaling or plateauing with increased number of cores) one can see that there is virtually no difference between 2+2 and 4+0, which to me is great news!

That review is a pile of garbage. I saw reviews where 4+0 was clearly better than 2+2, ofc, because inter-CCX communication wasn't there, which severely hampers performance. There are several articles on the CCX matter on the net, you should have a look at them too.

Edit: I finally found it again:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Ryzen-7-1800X-CPU-265804/Tests/Test-Review-1222033/

As you can see, 4+0 is a lot better than 2+2 - but Ryzen 1400+1500X will be 2+2 nonetheless.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Why? How is this going to help performance? Do we need 16 cores with HT? Really? How about getting your DDR4 past 3000+ with more than 2 sticks? How about getting true 8 core without the CCX bullshit? How about getting speed past 4.0GHz? How about getting XFR to function they way they should function instead of just 100MHz boost? Let's stick with the basics AMD. Learn to walk again before you try running.

A fair amount of that you can throw at Intel, or can you show me a 4+GHz 16core Intel not overclocked and Intel's run individual core's on a ring bus , they are not so different amd have higher core integration but in quads not pairs like Intel , hype went both ways Intel had their fare share.

 

[Super XP]

AMD should fork a 4c/8t processor (one CCX unit), use different fab that is high clock focused and "unlock" the TDP to 120W. That would perfectly counter 7700K. But apparently they weren't concerned about the clock difference...

Why would they be?
They are completely different Architectures. Where ZEN can gain tremendous performance while not Clocking up the CPU Frequency is from DDR4 Ram Speed. Because of Infinity Fabric being tied to that speed. Any memory speed increase should theoretically boost Ryzen performance quite a bit. Hopefully AMD updates Ryzen for faster Ram speeds.

Why? How is this going to help performance? Do we need 16 cores with HT? Really? How about getting your DDR4 past 3000+ with more than 2 sticks? How about getting true 8 core without the CCX bullshit? How about getting speed past 4.0GHz? How about getting XFR to function they way they should function instead of just 100MHz boost? Let's stick with the basics AMD. Learn to walk again before you try running.

AMD is coming out with a RAM speed update sometime in May that will ensure DDR4 3200 speeds with 4 DIMMs occupied. And DDR4 3400 to 4000 for 2 DIMMs occupied.

ZEN is a cleverly designed CPU Architecture, that caters to Mobile, Server & Desktop market. AMD is not Intel, where they can waste a Billion here and a Billion there. This is why AMD needed to be Smart about its CPU Design decisions. Reading up on ZEN, shows how smart AMD is. ZEN was designed by Jim Keller's team. That alone speaks 1,000 words.
ZEN is new, and is slowly being updated via motherboard bios updates and Windows updates, so give it some time. FYI, the last thing AMD needs is to follow into Intel's design footsteps. Absolutely No Thank You. ZEN will do just fine. It does Very Well in PC Gaming, and everything else you throw at it. Just because the i7 wins in 1080p with 10-20 FPS more over Ryzen, doesn't make the Ryzen unplayable lol.

16 Core CPU. Bring it on, because people rather have CHOICE versus the forced Stagnation Intel has caused for 5 years now.

 

[[XC] Oj101]

Right on the money. I wonder who leaked this as not many people know.

 

[yeeeeman]

This might just be the best move AMD could make with their CPU comeback strategy. I was always curious about why was the price of Ryzen R7 1800X so low compared to Intel, even though the performance is right there with the big boys. And please, don't bring the gaming argument, because you don't buy a 1000$ Intel CPU only for gaming. Also, 1800X is quite good in gaming, indeed not being on par with 7700K, but it is good enough in gaming and much better than 7700K on everything else.
Not to divert from the main idea here, I guess they had to make something with defective Naples dies so, here you go. I think they will release a 16 core version with close to 3.0Ghz frequency, one 12 core and the 8 core is with question mark because I don't see the point of it. Just like the 4 core CPU that you can buy for X99. Wattage will probably be in the same ballpark as Intels 10 core part ~140W, but with such a good energy management that we saw in 1800X, probably the idle and low utilization consumption will be very good.
In the end, they need to make sure this new platform is released without the issues that Ryzen 7 had and I think the future looks bright for them.

 

[jaggerwild]

"AMD is coming out with a RAM speed update sometime in May that will ensure DDR4 3200 speeds with 4 DIMMs occupied. And DDR4 3400 to 4000 for 2 DIMMs occupied."

lolz!
How are they going to fix dual memory limitations, when the controller is in the CPU?

 

[Caring1]

This sounds like the consumer chip based on Naples that was announced already a while ago by AMD.
Alright if you have deep pockets.

 

[Slizzo]

"AMD is coming out with a RAM speed update sometime in May that will ensure DDR4 3200 speeds with 4 DIMMs occupied. And DDR4 3400 to 4000 for 2 DIMMs occupied."

lolz!
How are they going to fix dual memory limitations, when the controller is in the CPU?

It's a microcode and motherboard manufacturer issue. MSI already pushed out one of the updates that AMD has presented to help alleviate memory compatibility issues.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...a-xmp_for_better_ryzen_memory_compatibility/1

 

[theGryphon]

This sounds like the consumer chip based on Naples that was announced already a while ago by AMD.
Alright if you have deep pockets.

More like prosumer, like Intel HEDT line and Titan X. Most people would be hard-pressed to claim that they need it, but nobody would deny that they want it. Those with deeper pockets will not have too hard a time to justify their purchase, especially over Intel counterparts (then again, those with really deep pockets will also justify the possibly 5% performance increase with Intel parts for 50%+ price increase)...

 

[jaggerwild]

It's a microcode and motherboard manufacturer issue. MSI already pushed out one of the updates that AMD has presented to help alleviate memory compatibility issues.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...a-xmp_for_better_ryzen_memory_compatibility/1

You cant read? I said dual channel memory NOT XMP, show me the fix for quad channel memory! I dont care about XMP! WOW memory optimization lolz! Cause it wont run at rated speeds if at all WHAT A BONUS!

 

[Slizzo]

You cant read? I said dual channel memory NOT XMP, show me the fix for quad channel memory! I dont care about XMP! WOW memory optimization lolz! Cause it wont run at rated speeds if at all WHAT A BONUS!

Well Mr. SmartyPants, you really can't fix something that the platform doesn't have (AM4 does not have quad channel memory, only my platform, X99 has it. AM4 is still stuck on Dual-Channel.)

Also, MSI's update is likely this update that AMD released to their partners not long ago : https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...edly_released_new_agesa_microcode_for_ryzen/1


So before you accuse someone of not reading, maybe you should do a little yourself as well, eh?