New AMD CPU's rumored summer 2019

[Saphyron]

I was planning to upgrade Q3 2019 if these numbers are correct and Intel does not bring anything better to the table I will be switching to AMD for the first time since phenom 2 x4 945 black edition.

I am looking forward to CES next month.

[Fascinate]

Yall on crack if you believe any of that. 5.1ghz 16c cpus for 499 and entry level 6c12t for 99 bucks, lmao ya right.

[Vash The Stampede]

Yall on crack if you believe any of that. 5.1ghz 16c cpus for 499 and entry level 6c12t for 99 bucks, lmao ya right.

If you've watched AdoredTV it makes sense since the cores are now separated from the rest of the CPU and thus allowing for higher clocks. It might also explain why it's cheaper since there's less waste since the CPU chipsets are smaller, plus the I/O chip is made with 14nm since it doesn't need to be 7nm for high clocks. The real surprise is that AMD is doing chiplets for consumer CPU's and they're putting in Navi graphics that might be equivalent to a RX 470.

[Fascinate]

If you've watched AdoredTV it makes sense since the cores are now separated from the rest of the CPU and thus allowing for higher clocks. It might also explain why it's cheaper since there's less waste since the CPU chipsets are smaller, plus the I/O chip is made with 14nm since it doesn't need to be 7nm for high clocks. The real surprise is that AMD is doing chiplets for consumer CPU's and they're putting in Navi graphics that might be equivalent to a RX 470.

Its good to be optimistic but you also have to be realistic my dude, AMD is not going to be selling people 12c FIVE GIGAHERTZ (the new zen chips arent going to be hitting that number anyways) cpu's for 329.00 lol. I honestly dont even understand how this has made the rounds on so many websites, are people really this gullible?

[mrgreenthump]

Its good to be optimistic but you also have to be realistic my dude, AMD is not going to be selling people 12c FIVE GIGAHERTZ (the new zen chips arent going to be hitting that number anyways) cpu's for 329.00 lol. I honestly dont even understand how this has made the rounds on so many websites, are people really this gullible?

And you base this on what exactly? The numbers seem high, but there is research into chiplets and chip binning that support this. Maybe this got blown a bit by the websites, but it's hard to refute it, as the data seems to support it. Also the 5GHz boost is probably with XFR again, meaning it's 1-2 core at that speed and tapers off from there.. much like with Intels "5" GHz chips.

What comes to the cost.. It's not unrealistic. Assuming they are using chiplets, their silicon costs should be way under $100 to make these. So putting them at prices where it seems like an impossible deal(when actually making a nice profit for them) is the right move if they ever want to get more market share. They could do the Nvidia tactic and put em to $800+, but they simply don't have the mindshare for it to be any bit sensible. Lisa Sue has said again and again that they want to be disruptive in the market and if this seems to be exactly what they need to do so. While Intel is down, it's not the time to let them get up, but keep kicking them till you know they won't bully you out again.

Not that I think your feelings are outright wrong, there is much to be suspect about this. Just you'd have to show us something to base what you are saying.

[Fascinate]

And you base this on what exactly? The numbers seem high, but there is research into chiplets and chip binning that support this. Maybe this got blown a bit by the websites, but it's hard to refute it, as the data seems to support it. Also the 5GHz boost is probably with XFR again, meaning it's 1-2 core at that speed and tapers off from there.. much like with Intels "5" GHz chips.

What comes to the cost.. It's not unrealistic. Assuming they are using chiplets, their silicon costs should be way under $100 to make these. So putting them at prices where it seems like an impossible deal(when actually making a nice profit for them) is the right move if they ever want to get more market share. They could do the Nvidia tactic and put em to $800+, but they simply don't have the mindshare for it to be any bit sensible. Lisa Sue has said again and again that they want to be disruptive in the market and if this seems to be exactly what they need to do so. While Intel is down, it's not the time to let them get up, but keep kicking them till you know they won't bully you out again.

Not that I think your feelings are outright wrong, there is much to be suspect about this. Just you'd have to show us something to base what you are saying.

Intel has been trying and failing at 7nm for many years, you want me to believe in two years AMD has not only caught up to but surpassed intel on that process node and they decide to increase core count by 50% and sell it for the same price as the 2700x?

I am not the one who needs to explain my thought process on this one champ, the people believing the leaks do lol.

[Evildeffy]

Whilst I take anything with a massive dose of salt, the logic used is possible.

However regardless of that I'll wait and see.

Having said all the above though Fascinate ... Didn't I tell you the exact same things For both Intel/nVidia releases on several occasions that you're now throwing towards others?
We've come full circle eh?

Edit: Intel's been failing at 10nm not 7nm, it's a different process. Just because they coincide with each other doesn't mean they are the same thing.

[Fascinate]

Whilst I take anything with a massive dose of salt, the logic used is possible.

However regardless of that I'll wait and see.

Having said all the above though Fascinate ... Didn't I tell you the exact same things For both Intel/nVidia releases on several occasions that you're now throwing towards others?
We've come full circle eh?

Edit: Intel's been failing at 10nm not 7nm, it's a different process. Just because they coincide with each other doesn't mean they are the same thing.

Huh?

Im never wrong on predictions like this, link me anything to the contrary.

[mrgreenthump]

Intel has been trying and failing at 7nm for many years, you want me to believe in two years AMD has not only caught up to but surpassed intel on that process node and they decide to increase core count by 50% and sell it for the same price as the 2700x?

I am not the one who needs to explain my thought process on this one champ, the people believing the leaks do lol.

It's not AMD's process node. It's TSMC's and what would you suggest they do when this supposed leak puts Zen 2 configuration as 8+8+IO. Hence the 12 core would be 6+6, so they are selling defective chips for the same price they sold a flawless chip on previous iteration. The price of the high end product went up considerably and you'll be paying 36% more. Which for a consumer platform is somewhat within reason, because the use cases where you'd ever use 16(or even 12) cores are rare even in professional workloads.

From my PoV it seems like fairly reasonable pricing considering that they need to sell these to other groups as well not just the enthusiast market.

And I'm in the camp that I'm not really believing this leak, but at the same time am somewhat realitic that this all could be true. Pricing is probably the thing that would change the most.

[Fascinate]

"Fairly reasonable pricing"

AMD sells the 16c 32t 2950x for 899.00, why in the world would they sell a faster chip on the mainstream platform that wouldnt work with the vast majority of AM4 boards for just over half that lol?

Its about being reasonable, and nothing in those slides have any reason to them.

[mrgreenthump]

AMD sells the 16c 32t 2950x for 899.00, why in the world would they sell a faster chip on the mainstream platform that wouldnt work with the vast majority of AM4 boards for just over half that lol?

Intel is doing just that to their own HEDT platform with 9900K outperforming most of their HEDT processors in prosumer workloads or when a new high-end card from Nvidia outperforms their previous gen prosumer card that costed near 3 times as much. Why aren't you calling them out on that?

Unlike Intel though, AMD actually can replace their current Treadripped line up with 24-64 core cpus.

[Temp name]

Honestly, what I have the biggest problem with in that lineup is the TDP.. 130W for 16C/32T at 5.1? That's fucking crazy

[Fascinate]

Intel is doing just that to their own HEDT platform with 9900K outperforming most of their HEDT processors in prosumer workloads or when a new high-end card from Nvidia outperforms their previous gen prosumer card that costed near 3 times as much. Why aren't you calling them out on that?

Unlike Intel though, AMD actually can replace their current Treadripped line up with 24-64 core cpus.

Thats been the case for a long time tho, even 7700k which is a 4c cpu was faster in stuff like adobe than the HEDT parts because of clockspeed/ipc/latency etc. Again its about being reasonable and this entire leak is way too far fetched to believe any of. Would it be awesome if AMD gave us 12c 5ghz cpu's for 329 bucks, hell ya. But that simply will not be happening.

Also what i said about the 16c parts applies to the 12c parts as well, you would not be able to slot the 3700x into a LOT of AM4 motherboards, they just dont have the vrm to handle it.

[mrgreenthump]

Honestly, what I have the biggest problem with in that lineup is the TDP.. 130W for 16C/32T at 5.1? That's fucking crazy

Sadly TDP means absolutely nothing. Each manufacturer have their own specifications. Like would you ever try to cool 9900K with a heatsink that has 95W heat dissipation.

Plus their boost is XFR, which has dynamic boost depending on temp and power limitations. It's unlikely you'll ever see more than 2 cores at 5.1 without somesort of enhancement enabled throwing the TDP rating straight out of the window.

[Erous]

I'm digging this. The timeframe matches with their CEO's response to 7nm happening in 2019. CES will tell the tale. What makes this seem more plausible, is that the rumored 7nm GPUs aren't anticipating to compete with TITAN or the 2080TI (Perhaps not even the 2080) instead just with the likes of the 2070 but at a better price point.

The information seems too detailed to be completely false, but I take it all with a grain of salt anyway. If this happens, I'll finally replace my 5820k and plan for a nextgen AMD GPU following/

[mrgreenthump]

Also what i said about the 16c parts applies to the 12c parts as well, you would not be able to slot the 3700x into a LOT of AM4 motherboards, they just dont have the vrm to handle it.

If I remember right, from the leak AdoredTV got, the 16 cores don't even work with anything but B550/X570 chipsets, but 12 core parts should.

Taking at face value the claim that TSMC 7nm is twice the power efficiency as glofo 14nm and the 12 core only has 13% higher clocks and 50% higher core count. So I wouldn't put it past them considering the binning that comes from chiplets should increase the silicon quality in the top-end considerably.

[Afrospinach]

Honestly, what I have the biggest problem with in that lineup is the TDP.. 130W for 16C/32T at 5.1? That's fucking crazy

Hey, I have my xeon w3570(i7 960) with 130w TDP and it is chooching perfectly after many many years.

The information seems too detailed to be completely false, but I take it all with a grain of salt anyway. If this happens, I'll finally replace my 5820k and plan for a nextgen AMD GPU following/

I cannot actually remember the last time I saw one of these leaks that was flat out wrong.

Food for thought: Intel already offloads some of it's 14nm on to TSMC because of their capacity issues. They have an existing relationship. It seems like they are having issues pushing clocks and yields on their 10nm for a long time now based on what has bee released.

Sooo... what are the chances this year we see Intel leapfrogging their own process for TSMC 7nm for their main processors as a stop gap. 7nm at TSMC is undersold, they have extra capacity apparently as far as the middle of next year.

[Shakadam]

"Fairly reasonable pricing"

AMD sells the 16c 32t 2950x for 899.00, why in the world would they sell a faster chip on the mainstream platform that wouldnt work with the vast majority of AM4 boards for just over half that lol?

Its about being reasonable, and nothing in those slides have any reason to them.

The Threadrippers on the X399 platform have certain other features beyond just core count that makes them more expensive. X399 offer quad channel memory, lots more PCI Express lanes and stuff like that. It's a similar thing with intel regarding X299 and Z390 chipsets.
Also keep in mind that the current Threadrippers like 2950x will ofc also be replaced with 7nm chips.


Personally I'm cautiously optimistic about this leak. I'm still not 100% if the increase in core count is actually true, but the pricing is probably correct and the clock speeds seems spot on with the ~25% increase in performance AMD claims the 7nm process offers over the 12/14nm process. A 25% increase would actually be 5,3-5,4Ghz so it's a little lower but some of that increase most likely comes from IPC improvements.

The Navi leaks seem even more genuine. Vega 64 + 15% performance is basically what you'd get by just shrinking the Vega 64 to 7nm which would allow for higher clock speeds and less power draw. Obviously that's not all they've done with Navi as they also move away from expensive HBM memory but yeah, the result on 7nm would be a tiny die = cheap to make and no more HBM = even cheaper. Both pricing and performance according to the leak are entirely within reason .

[Temp name]

Hey, I have my xeon w3570(i7 960) with 130w TDP and it is chooching perfectly after many many years.

And the Xeon W3570 has 4c/8t at 3.46, not 16c/32t at 5.1

Pretty fucking big difference

[Illiterate]

I could believe those core counts at maybe 4.5 GHz max. Anything over 5 seems unrealistic at this point.