New AMD CPU's rumored summer 2019

[Onikaroshi]

You arent understanding the topic at hand, go back and look at the rumors.

Still doesn't change the point that it wouldn't be a fair bench AT ALL, so you'd have to be silly in the head to do it. We don't know what will be released, rumors are rumors.

[Evildeffy]

What lol? You would have to be goofy in the head to not use a 12c or 16c chip in that cinebench demo if they are actually happening this year.

How you came to the conclusion that adored guy is "right" is beyond me lol. Sure its impressive they reached parity with a stock
9900k but we dont know anything beyond that.

Actually it does make perfect sense, this way they might price upwards and not show the full hand to Intel.

Following that it was an all-round win for the 9900K parity in every point, had it been higher core counts they couldn't stand on the power efficiency point either.

As he is actually right and the I/O die is present, the Chiplet is spaced for another chiplet (either GPU or CPU), meaning at any point that the AMD CPU is as fast at a minimum with 8 cores vs. the 9900K which we know is a miniature furnace, hard to cool and guzzles the power.
That in turn translates to either higher clock speeds or improved IPC or both with a silicon space left to extend it.

This was purely a showing of "Our tech at the same point of specs is better than yours Intel... suck it." and they succeeded.

However if you have listened to the technical content of AdoredTV regarding these... tell me where he was wrong.

Also stock 9900K is not far off from maxed out, remember that the 14nm+++ Coffee Lake uArch is pretty much at it's limits.

[Fascinate]

Actually it does make perfect sense, this way they might price upwards and not show the full hand to Intel.

Following that it was an all-round win for the 9900K parity in every point, had it been higher core counts they couldn't stand on the power efficiency point either.

As he is actually right and the I/O die is present, the Chiplet is spaced for another chiplet (either GPU or CPU), meaning at any point that the AMD CPU is as fast at a minimum with 8 cores vs. the 9900K which we know is a miniature furnace, hard to cool and guzzles the power.
That in turn translates to either higher clock speeds or improved IPC or both with a silicon space left to extend it.

This was purely a showing of "Our tech at the same point of specs is better than yours Intel... suck it." and they succeeded.

However if you have listened to the technical content of AdoredTV regarding these... tell me where he was wrong.

Also stock 9900K is not far off from maxed out, remember that the 14nm+++ Coffee Lake uArch is pretty much at it's limits.

I dont disagree that there looks like there is room on there for another chiplet, but why wouldnt they have put a 12c chip against the 9900k if they are coming out this year? My guess is it isnt happening, likely problems with latency.

The problem i have with the leaks are the specifics, go look at the 3700x specifically. AMD isnt going to sell a 12c 5ghz chip for 330 bucks, and i still dont believe they have hit the magic 5ghz number either yet.

[Wries]

I don't get why people defend Adored on this. First he made a video talking I/O die and then he did one saying there is probably no I/O die. Like.. if you guess all the things of course you will be right about something. Heck he probably retracted his claim about a CES reveal too at some point so he could be right either way there too. Face it, he got too comfortable with trusting anonymous throwaway email-accounts. Struck gold with RTX, not so much here.

There was no model list reveal at CES. The best and only consumer chip they presented was an 8-core. There is perhaps a technical possibility they can do a 16-core but it's either computex or won't happen this year. Given Intel has nothing on their plate until likely next year I wonder why they'd bother if their next 8-core can compete with the 9900K.

[Evildeffy]

I dont disagree that there looks like there is room on there for another chiplet, but why wouldnt they have put a 12c chip against the 9900k if they are coming out this year? My guess is it isnt happening, likely problems with latency.

The problem i have with the leaks are the specifics, go look at the 3700x specifically. AMD isnt going to sell a 12c 5ghz chip for 330 bucks, and i still dont believe they have hit the magic 5ghz number either yet.

Ignoring the specs (because AMD has not given anything out yet) the principle of the matter is shown that it is indeed possible.
If the 8 core "low end" design of ZEN 2 can beat the 9900K ... what will the higher end ones do.

Marketing wise it's actually very smart showing the 8C vs. 8C comparison along with the prior mentioned reasons.

Latency is a non-issue as you have the same build in Ryzen 1000/2000 series but with the I/O die there ... latency should be improved as well due to the design of it compared to Ryzen 1000/2000 series.. the I/O die is more than just a economic savings point.

Also ... do NOT compare Ryzen 1000/2000 to ZEN 2, they are 2 rather different (even if based on the same design) uArchs.
Like I said ... higher clocks, higher IPC of a combination of both.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't get why people defend Adored on this. First he made a video talking I/O die and then he did one saying there is probably no I/O die. Like.. if you guess all the things of course you will be right about something. Heck he probably retracted his claim about a CES reveal too at some point so he could be right either way there too. Face it, he got too comfortable with trusting anonymous throwaway email-accounts. Struck gold with RTX, not so much here.

There was no model list reveal at CES. The best and only consumer chip they presented was an 8-core. There is perhaps a technical possibility they can do a 16-core but it's either computex or won't happen this year. Given Intel has nothing on their plate until likely next year I wonder why they'd bother if their next 8-core can compete with the 9900K.

Because as much as he might be too trusting ... he was right in his speculation, he was on point even though he did say it mightn't have the I/O die.

It turns out his first speculation was right on the money, technical showings shows it's possible and will be done etc.

As far as total reveal... who knows, they stated mid 2019 ... so still about 5,5 months off ... a lot of things can happen in that time.

[Serenity91]

What lol? You would have to be goofy in the head to not use a 12c or 16c chip in that cinebench demo if they are actually happening this year.

How you came to the conclusion that adored guy is "right" is beyond me lol. Sure its impressive they reached parity with a stock
9900k but we dont know anything beyond that.

because the 9900k has so much OC potential right?

[Fascinate]

Ignoring the specs (because AMD has not given anything out yet) the principle of the matter is shown that it is indeed possible.
If the 8 core "low end" design of ZEN 2 can beat the 9900K ... what will the higher end ones do.

Marketing wise it's actually very smart showing the 8C vs. 8C comparison along with the prior mentioned reasons.

Latency is a non-issue as you have the same build in Ryzen 1000/2000 series but with the I/O die there ... latency should be improved as well due to the design of it compared to Ryzen 1000/2000 series.. the I/O die is more than just a economic savings point.

See i disagree here, most people dont understand how important ipc and clockspeeds are, they just want to see higher numbers and more cores. If amd truly does have 12c or 16c chips releasing on the mainstream they should have used it in that cinebench demo because that would have been a much more epic win for them.

I will say im surprised they got an 8c to match a 9900k, while impressive we also dont know if thats overclocked.

- - - Updated - - -

because the 9900k has so much OC potential right?

Again, not the point. The entire point of this thread is will AMD release a 12c or 16c chip this year with boost frequencies reaching 5ghz? That question is still unanswered.

[Evildeffy]

See i disagree here, most people dont understand how important ipc and clockspeeds are, they just want to see higher numbers and more cores. If amd truly does have 12c or 16c chips releasing on the mainstream they should have used it in that cinebench demo because that would have been a much more epic win for them.

I will say im surprised they got an 8c to match a 9900k, while impressive we also dont know if thats overclocked.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, not the point. The entire point of this thread is will AMD release a 12c or 16c chip this year with boost frequencies reaching 5ghz? That question is still unanswered.

The point of this thread is new CPUs with AdoredTV leaking some fantastic numbers.
Whilst Frequency/IPC is still up for grabs ... the matter of their "low end" chip, if rumours from this are true which they might be seeing the showing today is not.

There are new CPUs and they'll compete and potentially destroy it... THAT's what the point of this thread is.

As for you disagreeing with choice ... that's up to the marketing department.
Say it is the standard layout of Ryzen 3/5/7 (not the 9) and saying "Oh BTW ... that showing was our Ryzen 3" is far more impactful.

[Fascinate]

The point of this thread is new CPUs with AdoredTV leaking some fantastic numbers.
Whilst Frequency/IPC is still up for grabs ... the matter of their "low end" chip, if rumours from this are true which they might be seeing the showing today is not.

There are new CPUs and they'll compete and potentially destroy it... THAT's what the point of this thread is.

As for you disagreeing with choice ... that's up to the marketing department.
Say it is the standard layout of Ryzen 3/5/7 (not the 9) and saying "Oh BTW ... that showing was our Ryzen 3" is far more impactful.

Now you are just drinking the koolaid, odd i didnt think of you as an amd fanboy before that comment lol.

Im all for AMD blowing up, but thinking that is a ryzen 5 (its obviously not a 3) is absurd.

[Onikaroshi]

I guess I am also no longer recommending to anyone they should wait.

Eh, unless they NEED to upgrade, I'd recommend people wait out the whole gen.

[Livevil]

Sure its impressive they reached parity with a stock
9900k but we dont know anything beyond that.

9900k boosts on all cores at 4,7k GHz.

Gets beaten by an early sample that consumes 30% less power. You can deduct some stuff on your own.

[Fascinate]

9900k boosts on all cores at 4,7k GHz.

Gets beaten by an early sample that consumes 30% less power. You can deduct some stuff on your own.

Like i said that is impressive on its own, but we dont know how overclocked the sample was. We can assume they gained some IPC so my guess is it was running all core at 4.2 or 4.3ghz. Good, but a far cry from the rumors we were given about 12c 5ghz boost cpu's.

Edit: Changed numbers to 4.2 or 4.3ghz, with the low power consumption they were showing thats about as high of an all core that would score that number in cinebench and also have that low of power draw, while also taking into account ipc gains.

5.0ghz cpu's for amd this gen are a pipe dream, but still cool they gained some IPC.

[nToxik]

They compared an 8c chip against the 9900k that showed similar results. Since these aren't actually launching until mid-2019, there is no need to show all their cards. This gives them time to finalize ipc clocks.

As we get closer to launch, we will see more performance related info. It's a smart move by AMD.

[Saphyron]

Well unless Intel pushes something grand out of the window by late autumn. It seems I will finally upgrade into AMD for the first time in many many years.

[Evildeffy]

Now you are just drinking the koolaid, odd i didnt think of you as an amd fanboy before that comment lol.

Im all for AMD blowing up, but thinking that is a ryzen 5 (its obviously not a 3) is absurd.

No .. I'm looking at technical possibilities and marketing.
Do you even comprehend the statement of that sentence you bolded?

Also would you like me to show you exactly what I own to show you just how much of an "AMD Fanboy" I am with a grand total of 0, nada, ZILCH, DIDDLY SQUAT AMD CPUs and 1 graphics card (R9 390X).

Where I have multiple "Competitor parts"?

Also read the context of the statement you quoted since you're happily ignoring it I'll point you to it again.
Read the context of the statement.

I couldn't give a flying hoot which brand I go for, what I do look into is technical capabilities and possibilities, if you can deduce logical conclusions then you would've realized why I picked the statement I did when it states so right before the bolded part.

Also with your later statement about calculating power draw with speed and what seemed right... again I point you to prior points and statements in the thread ... Do NOT compare Ryzen 1000/2000 capabilities to ZEN 2, different uARCH and ENTIRELY different Lithography from GlobalFoundries/Samsung 14nm to TSMC 7nm.
Incomparable.

[mrgreenthump]

Like i said that is impressive on its own, but we dont know how overclocked the sample was. We can assume they gained some IPC so my guess is it was running all core at 4.2 or 4.3ghz. Good, but a far cry from the rumors we were given about 12c 5ghz boost cpu's.

Edit: Changed numbers to 4.2 or 4.3ghz, with the low power consumption they were showing thats about as high of an all core that would score that number in cinebench and also have that low of power draw, while also taking into account ipc gains.

5.0ghz cpu's for amd this gen are a pipe dream, but still cool they gained some IPC.

You do know how boost works? 9900K boosts "up to" 5 GHz, but does that on a few cores at most. AMD's boost worked fairly similarly on zen and zen+. So one can assume Zen 2 isn't going to change it, hence 1-2 cores boosting to 5GHz doesn't sound any bit far fetched if they can match 9900K core to core.

[Wries]

Because as much as he might be too trusting ... he was right in his speculation, he was on point even though he did say it mightn't have the I/O die.

It turns out his first speculation was right on the money, technical showings shows it's possible and will be done etc.

As far as total reveal... who knows, they stated mid 2019 ... so still about 5,5 months off ... a lot of things can happen in that time.

He can do impressive speculations sometimes but really for Zen 2 it wasn't so. Basically the thing he got right is that the new cpus are aiming to be better than the old ones. And that one chiplet will contain 8 cores which isn't exactly a shocker considering AMD revealed their Zen2 chiplets for Epyc some time ago. The thing he really had on Zen 2 that was noteworthy was that leak and its details in product stack, announcement plans and claims about a separate chiplet design for mainstream, but so far it's not looking all too true.

And I get hung up on the chiplet I/O thing especially. I know it doesn't really matter much to the end consumer. But he SHOULDN'T have been wildly speculating about this given what he himself have said in the past regarding manufacturing. One 8c chiplet with i/o and one without, what a waste and manufacturers puzzle for the one company who is trying to keep costs down. He should have realised this considering his talks have covered how AMD needs to be simple and smart in order to compete, but somehow these anonymous leakers took prescedence over his own usual line of thinking about stuff.

[Fascinate]

No .. I'm looking at technical possibilities and marketing.
Do you even comprehend the statement of that sentence you bolded?

Also would you like me to show you exactly what I own to show you just how much of an "AMD Fanboy" I am with a grand total of 0, nada, ZILCH, DIDDLY SQUAT AMD CPUs and 1 graphics card (R9 390X).

Where I have multiple "Competitor parts"?

Also read the context of the statement you quoted since you're happily ignoring it I'll point you to it again.
Read the context of the statement.

I couldn't give a flying hoot which brand I go for, what I do look into is technical capabilities and possibilities, if you can deduce logical conclusions then you would've realized why I picked the statement I did when it states so right before the bolded part.

Also with your later statement about calculating power draw with speed and what seemed right... again I point you to prior points and statements in the thread ... Do NOT compare Ryzen 1000/2000 capabilities to ZEN 2, different uARCH and ENTIRELY different Lithography from GlobalFoundries/Samsung 14nm to TSMC 7nm.
Incomparable.

Our brains work too differently to have a coherent discussion lol.

I like to look at things in realistic terms given the current marketplace and what are most likely scenarios, and you only view it as a technical discussion/whats technically possible.

- - - Updated - - -

He can do impressive speculations sometimes but really for Zen 2 it wasn't so. Basically the thing he got right is that the new cpus are aiming to be better than the old ones. And that one chiplet will contain 8 cores which isn't exactly a shocker considering AMD revealed their Zen2 chiplets for Epyc some time ago. The thing he really had on Zen 2 that was noteworthy was that leak and its details in product stack, announcement plans and claims about a separate chiplet design for mainstream, but so far it's not looking all too true.

And I get hung up on the chiplet I/O thing especially. I know it doesn't really matter much to the end consumer. But he SHOULDN'T have been wildly speculating about this given what he himself have said in the past regarding manufacturing. One 8c chiplet with i/o and one without, what a waste and manufacturers puzzle for the one company who is trying to keep costs down. He should have realised this considering his talks have covered how AMD needs to be simple and smart in order to compete, but somehow these anonymous leakers took prescedence over his own usual line of thinking about stuff.

Exactly this^^, it was the specific listings of the zen 2 processors that everyone really wanted to know about, and so far zip zilch nada.

[Evildeffy]

Our brains work too differently to have a coherent discussion lol.

I like to look at things in realistic terms given the current marketplace and what are most likely scenarios, and you only view it as a technical discussion/whats technically possible.

The discussion can be coherent, the difference is that like with your previous posts you add your "gut feeling" to it, which in a business world shouldn't be present.

You yet again fail to actually answer the questions given properly, but it's fine ... let's agree to disagree but in turn I want you to state things not with certainty and say "That's it!" but more with "I have a feeling this may be it!". See how the subtle wording makes all the difference in the world?

[Evildeffy]

He can do impressive speculations sometimes but really for Zen 2 it wasn't so. Basically the thing he got right is that the new cpus are aiming to be better than the old ones. And that one chiplet will contain 8 cores which isn't exactly a shocker considering AMD revealed their Zen2 chiplets for Epyc some time ago. The thing he really had on Zen 2 that was noteworthy was that leak and its details in product stack, announcement plans and claims about a separate chiplet design for mainstream, but so far it's not looking all too true.

And I get hung up on the chiplet I/O thing especially. I know it doesn't really matter much to the end consumer. But he SHOULDN'T have been wildly speculating about this given what he himself have said in the past regarding manufacturing. One 8c chiplet with i/o and one without, what a waste and manufacturers puzzle for the one company who is trying to keep costs down. He should have realised this considering his talks have covered how AMD needs to be simple and smart in order to compete, but somehow these anonymous leakers took prescedence over his own usual line of thinking about stuff.

He may have surmised a different line of ZEN 2 chiplets for Epyc/ZEN 2 but the I/O die, even though wild and hopeful, turned out to be true which makes it better for us but make no mistake though ... the I/O die is cheaper to produce that putting it in with the rest of the CPU dies.
This is an economic move as much as technological enhancement.