New AMD CPU's rumored summer 2019

[Evildeffy]

Don't trust vendor tests, they are biased. Beating half year-old CPU is not a huge achievement. By the time AMD will release this CPU, Intel will release another, AMD is always following. But yeah, competition is good. Not gonna buy AMD, of course, Intel is way better and more secure choice, but I like AMD nevertheless.

Actually in terms of "security" AMD is actually more secure right now See the whole Spectre debacle thing

Also with Intel's 10nm being delayed till the end of 2019 (by their own statement) they'll have no immediate response.

- - - Updated - - -

Well the op shows amds G series CPUs which have integrated graphics

Pffft.... fair enough!
Damn APUs!

[Erous]

I'm waiting for the price points of the new F chips before making a decision regarding my next platform upgrade. If they're solidly competing with the 2700x I'll go with them, otherwise I'll either go 2700x or wait till 3rd gen ryzen

[mrgreenthump]

Right now it doesn't, but speculation with the new F chips could be a telling tale. Again, I'm speculating, but the assumption is that the silicon uses for the GPU would instead be dormant and the dormant silicon be there as a heat spreader basically. Curious to see if this does happen and at a proper price point.

I wouldn't expect much of a difference really, feels more like these are parts that have defective iGPU and they want to use them in the wake of the huge manufacturing problems they've been facing of late.

[Evildeffy]

I wouldn't expect much of a difference really, feels more like these are parts that have defective iGPU and they want to use them in the wake of the huge manufacturing problems they've been facing of late.

It depends, if it's physically fused off it may have a noticeable effect.

Like I said prior on this forum that even if you don't use the iGPU it still gets powered and flow of info from the board.
That being disabled reduces complexity and won't generate any traffic nor heat and simply be a literal heatsink.

It won't be huge but it might get regularly higher clocks.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do we have a bunch of people that think Intel is going to make some huge jump forward with their next CPUs? They're not moving to 10nm in 2019 and they haven't given us any recent reasons to expect large gains in single core performance.

It's unknown on desktop parts but laptop parts for 10nm will be "ready for holidays 2019" which means the end of 2019, desktop parts are supposed to follow that up very closely.

But like Intel themselves posted in their own roadmap .. 10nm will not beat 14nm+++ in performance until the 2nd optimization cycle of 10nm.

So unless that's changed it's pretty much Coffee Lake Refresh for higher speeds (gaming) and 10nm for higher core counts but lower speeds.

[Dilbon]

There will be more than 8 cores.

https://twitter.com/markhachman/stat...97464624693248

[Linkedblade]

There will be more than 8 cores.

https://twitter.com/markhachman/stat...97464624693248

Yeah, I would have thought that the extra space would be used for the entire product stack to have two chiplets. But maybe the higher SKU parts will have one die and the lower will have two. So a higher SKU will have one chiplets with 8 cores and the lower could have two chiplets with only 4 good cores on each.

[Evildeffy]

Yeah, I would have thought that the extra space would be used for the entire product stack to have two chiplets. But maybe the higher SKU parts will have one die and the lower will have two. So a higher SKU will have one chiplets with 8 cores and the lower could have two chiplets with only 4 good cores on each.

There can be both ... with 1 chiplet core design having an added "dummy die" as well.

Whether they will be differentiated by different models ... is another question.

[Livevil]

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.

Threadripper 2950X, 16C32T, boosts currently to 4.4 GHz. Having a 12C24T cpu on a smaller node with a newer architecture boosting to 5GHz isn't a pipe dream. 9900k boosts to 5Ghz already on a 14nm node and is less efficient/clock compared to ryzen.

[Fascinate]

Threadripper 2950X, 16C32T, boosts currently to 4.4 GHz. Having a 12C24T cpu on a smaller node with a newer architecture boosting to 5GHz isn't a pipe dream. 9900k boosts to 5Ghz already on a 14nm node and is less efficient/clock compared to ryzen.

Oh they might get close to a single core boosting to 5ghz, but its not going to be like intel where you can run all cores there overclocked.

I just want people to keep perspective here, this thread is specifically about the leaked specs for zen 2 and AMD simply releasing a 12c cpu on x570 isnt close to what people were hyped about in the first place.

[Shakadam]

Oh they might get close to a single core boosting to 5ghz, but its not going to be like intel where you can run all cores there overclocked.

I just want people to keep perspective here, this thread is specifically about the leaked specs for zen 2 and AMD simply releasing a 12c cpu on x570 isnt close to what people were hyped about in the first place.

This is pretty much exactly what I was expecting. Would have liked some more info like possible pricing and such but it's probably too early still.

Cinebench is admittedly a program that likes AMD CPU's but narrowly beating a 9900K with the same amount of cores and with a considerably lower power draw is still impressive from an engineering sample CPU. Because never in the history of...ever, has an ES CPU been as fast as the finished product

[Remilia]

I don't see any problem with showing a 8 to 8 comparison and apparently Lisa Su noted that there'd be more.

With performance parity (for cinebench anyways) that means they matched IPC and clock, or excel at one or the other. I doubt they'd manage to exceed Intel's clock speed on TSMC 7nm and especially high frequency is an unknown with that process node too. The other possibility is that their SMT is absolutely balls to the walls insane. Noting also that this is still not finalized.
Either way it does show a 15% performance increase at lower power.

[mrgreenthump]

Oh they might get close to a single core boosting to 5ghz, but its not going to be like intel where you can run all cores there overclocked.

I just want people to keep perspective here, this thread is specifically about the leaked specs for zen 2 and AMD simply releasing a 12c cpu on x570 isnt close to what people were hyped about in the first place.

Don't think anyone expects 12 or 16 cores at 5GHz without immense heat. But getting 8 there.. maybe doable. That's a really big maybe though, because this being the first product TSMC 7 nm HPC past 3 GHz we know absolutely nothing on how it will perform and handle the clock increases.

[mrgreenthump]

If it gets to 5GHz on one core, with enough cooling and voltage should be able to do 5 on all cores, at least for 8.\

Main concern for me remains price. If they come up with this "look guys, we have a 9900K equivalent at just 500USD!", they can shove it up their arse, just like they should do with the VII. However, if they can come up with something as disruptive as the 2700x was, all sins forgiven.

Well VII is way more expensive to make than an RTX 2080, the HBM2 alone is like more than $300. Also they shouldn't have marketed it as a gaming card, because really it isn't. It's more of a productivity card with good gaming performance.

Zen 2 is nowhere near that expensive to make, the rough estimate of the silicon costs are around $35-$45 for single chiplet + I/O and $50-$60 for 2x chiplet + I/O. Ofc this is assuming the I/O is from Global Foundaries, so you need to count shipping costs into that so it's probably closer to $45 for single and $60 for double. In comparison Zen+ silicon cost should have been right around $35.

Also didn't they compare 1800X to a 6900K when marketing Ryzen 1000 series and 1800X ended up 2x cheaper than 6900K. There are quite a lot of comparisons also.. Around the same performance, 2x cheaper and way lower wattage.

[Deleted]

Pretty sure Lisa Su said during the Keynote that the demo cpu is early sample and clocks are NOT final. So they already beat Intel(barely), if they can clock at 5Ghz (and I see no reason for them not to be able to do it) I think they just might beat intel in performance on both single and multi threaded loads

[Kagthul]

Why do we have a bunch of people that think Intel is going to make some huge jump forward with their next CPUs? They're not moving to 10nm in 2019 and they haven't given us any recent reasons to expect large gains in single core performance.

.. did someone miss the announcement that Intel 10nm is entering mass production in a few weeks to meet a summer launch?

[mrgreenthump]

.. did someone miss the announcement that Intel 10nm is entering mass production in a few weeks to meet a summer launch?

Nope, but people been in the 10nm waiting room since 2016.. So they are probably waiting to see actual numbers and real evidence of it working before hyping it up. Intel's 10nm is such a mess that nobody can really track what is going on. They've said a lot of things about it but it has never really panned out.

This production announcement came just a bit shy of the AMD event on 7nm, much like their 5GHz 28 core before threadripper announcement.. so it's natural to not trust them on their word at this point.

Also the announcement was about Ice Lake mobility SoC hitting mass production and coming out later this year. Hence still no word on their next generation desktop. But don't get me wrong, the fact that they got any chip hitting HVM on 10 nm is good news and maybe we'll see their 10nm desktop at the end of the year.

[Gray_Matter]

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.

That cinebench score is too low for a 12 cores. The 12 core threadripper has a much higher score. AMD also confirmed that each chiplet has 8 cores and the die they showed has only 1 chiplet on it.

It sounds like Anandtech spoke to the AMD reps:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13829...e-4-eight-core

- - - Updated - - -

Considering the prices on Vega VII, I am not expecting anything positive for Ryzen 3000 anymore. I am definitely not buying AMD if the price is not much lower. There's never a point to go with the underdog unless they can undercut the market leader severely.

That's very strange logic. It sounds like you want the underdog to go bankrupt but are happy for the market leader to make tons of cash. Why wouldn't you choose an AMD CPU if it's 5% faster at the same cost or 5% cheaper for the same speed?

Adopting the attitude that I won't buy from the little guy unless he is a lot cheaper is part of what got us into the situation where Intel milked people for years on dual cores.

- - - Updated - - -

I will definitely do that. By 2020 I will probably have enough money for a full top end PC with something like 3080ti and the next i9 in this rhythm, since I saved the money I wanted to buy a 2080+9900K with.

What makes you think the next processors from Intel aren't going to go the chiplet route like AMD? They will start battling through the same interconnect issues that AMD had to. Intel can't keep making massive dies. It's not economical.

- - - Updated - - -

Don't think anyone expects 12 or 16 cores at 5GHz without immense heat. But getting 8 there.. maybe doable. That's a really big maybe though, because this being the first product TSMC 7 nm HPC past 3 GHz we know absolutely nothing on how it will perform and handle the clock increases.

They are more likely to get there with 12 cores than 8. 12 cores is a 2 chiplets with 6 active cores each. 8 cores = 1 chiplet.

[mrgreenthump]

They are more likely to get there with 12 cores than 8. 12 cores is a 2 chiplets with 6 active cores each. 8 cores = 1 chiplet.

Brainfart on my part, was still living in the AdoredTV leak that put the 8 core as 4/8+4/8 chiplets.

[Bryntrollian]

AMD is no actual underdog, they're a Big Tech 3 corporation, and clearly just as greedy as Intel and Nvidia. They have good pricing at time, like with some Ryzens (do keep in mind, where I live, the 8700K was cheaper than the 1700x for example) or with the HD4800 cards in the past.

But they also do insane prices when they feel like they can, for example when they were leading in the CPU market, they were selling Athlons at 1000$, and Fury and Vega were abysmally priced, just like VII looks to be.

My position on each of these 3 corporations is:

- each are immoral and greedy
- each is super big, wealthy and probably "too big to fail", and each would be rescued by the government if in crisis.
- neither cares about us, the consumer, they care first and foremost about creating increasing amounts of profit for shareholders

So, I am also NOT caring for them, at all, in fact, I despise them. I know a lot of people consider themselves "fans" of these corporations in some way, and I feel pity for them, I consider them deluded, like being in an abusive relationship.

Consumers should always follow their own interest above anything else, and never find excuses for corporations.

AMD is certainly an underdog if you consider it's market cap in comparison to Intel and Nvidia.

Market Capitalization
AMD  = 20 Billion 
NVDA = 86 Billion
INTC = 219 Billion

[Onikaroshi]

The VII is not.

They threw too much HBM2 on it, that's the major problem... you could cut out a huge chunk of pricing if you cut 16 gigs down to 8 for consumer cards. Nothing WE do as gamers will need 16 for many many years to come. Leave the 16 for content creators to fill up, they're already paying buko bucks for cards.