Ryzen vs i7 (Mainstream); Threadripper vs i9 (HEDT); X299 vs X399; Xeon vs Epyc

Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by ajc9988, Jun 7, 2017.

  1. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,163
    Messages:
    5,682
    Likes Received:
    3,594
    Trophy Points:
    431
    they might be straight up saving the best binns for 3950x and TR never know. also we knew AMD's supply will be an issue. intel is like 5x-10x size when comes to market share so if AMD wish have a chance at even 50% they'll need to produce at least 5x the amount they use to sell. they dont got their fab and TSMC got other customers too so i could see some shortage problem.
     
    Arrrrbol, jaybee83 and Papusan like this.
  2. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,500
    Messages:
    9,403
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    431
    You have to remember that each AM4, Epyc and TR2 chip requires a 12nm I/O chip and then each AM4 1 CCX and the 3900x and 3950x require 2 CCX chips and then Epyc and TR will require 4-8 CCX chips each. I doubt they can produce them fast enough. This is the advantage of the monolithic dies.
     
    hmscott likes this.
  3. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    6,547
    Messages:
    19,870
    Likes Received:
    24,708
    Trophy Points:
    931
    There are no advantages to monolithic dies that provide similar / comparible performance as the Chiplet CPU/IO designs.

    The chiplet's have better yield, and being so much smaller there are many more produced per wafer as compared to the gigantic monolithic dies. Offloading the IO portion of the die helps out even more as it can be outsourced to non-7nm production - saving 7nm production for the CPU chiplets.

    The aerial space is about the same between the designs but the yield for the smaller chiplet's vs monolithic dies provides more "CPU"'s per wafer, more complete CPU's per wafer.

    That's why Intel has so many problems supplying monolithic CPU's like the 9900k, taking far more fab "space" to produce the same number of final CPU's, costing them far more to make than AMD's chiplets.

    AMD's TSMC fab allocation needs to be bumped up, and likely AMD has already worked out a schedule of fab capacity increases - but the Ryzen 3 has been so popular that the demand is greater than the planned capacity.

    Hopefully AMD was able to negotiate a faster ramp up of capacity, or is looking elsewhere to provide the fab capacity, or can help TSMC expand production capacity, or we will continue to end up waiting for product moving forward.
     
    jaybee83 and ajc9988 like this.
  4. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,500
    Messages:
    9,403
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Even if there are 4 CCX per wafer space as say the 9900k again TR and Epyc require up to 8 along with the I/O die. Eventually AMD will iron this all out, people just need to have patience is all.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2019
    hmscott likes this.
  5. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,163
    Messages:
    5,682
    Likes Received:
    3,594
    Trophy Points:
    431
    not 0 advantages. with intel's 10+ yr old arch, especially it is because it's monolithic + ring bus design that it has overall lower memory latency than zen2. it is about the only reason + frequency that allows it to compete in only gaming benchmark atm and nothing else.
     
  6. Papusan

    Papusan JOKEBOOK's Sucks! Dont waste your $$$ on FILTHY

    Reputations:
    23,010
    Messages:
    23,720
    Likes Received:
    41,212
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Asus: "AMD strikes turbo frequency in Ryzen 3000 series"Sweclockers.com | Aug 28, 2019

    According to a report from Asus employees, AMD has begun to curb Boost performance for Ryzen 3000 processors, with extended service life as a reason for the change.

    When AMD launched the processors in the Ryzen 3000 family, they offered a decent performance boost compared to previous Ryzen 2000 processors. Some of these performance gains lie in the architectural improvements in Zen 2, and some in the higher clock frequencies the processors reach.

    This also includes the turbo frequencies of the processors. For example, the top model AMD Ryzen 9 3900X runs in the 3.8 GHz base frequency with a turbo frequency of up to 4.6 GHz. These frequencies can also be more often reached across multiple cores compared to previous generation processors. These turbo frequencies were originally intended to work at overly aggressive levels according to an Asus representative.

    Every new bios I get asked the boost question all over again, I haven't tested a newer version of AGESA that changes the current state of 1003 boost, not even 1004. If I do know of changes, I will specifically state this. They were being too aggressive with the boost previously, the current boost behavior is more in line with their confidence in long term reliability and I have not heard of any changes to this stance, because I have heard of a 'more customizable' version in the Future

    The information comes from the long-known overclocking profile Shamino, who is employed by Asus and works with motherboards. In a post on the Overclock.net forum ( via Reddit ), he describes how new motherboard firmware software revisions to the Ryzen 3000 family lower processor turbo frequencies.

    The data indicates that the turbo frequencies initially worked too aggressively with the Ryzen 3000 processors, and that adjustments in new versions of the firmware software AGESA reduced these. The purpose of the reduced turbo frequencies is said to be that AMD wants to achieve better durability and reliability in the long run. Shamino also says it has received information that upcoming AGESA updates will offer more adaptability to turbo frequencies.

    When AMD introduced the Ryzen 3000 family, Precision Boost Overdrive, a further development of Precision Boost that was introduced with the Ryzen 2000 generation, was also unveiled. With Precision Boost Overdrive, the processor's highest possible clock frequency can be overclocked by 200 MHz when the load requires it.

    Thus, with the latest adjustments in the AGESA software, the highest clock frequency of the Ryzen 3000 processors with Precision Boost Overdrive will be lower than what was stated when the products were launched.

    ----------------------------------------------

    As a small curiosity...
    AMD to Cough Up $12.1 Million to Settle "Bulldozer" Core Count Class-Action Lawsuit
    AMD reached a settlement in the Class Action Lawsuit filed against it, over alleged false-marketing of the core-counts of its eight-core FX-series processors based on the "Bulldozer" microarchitecture
    $12.1 million ain't that much but still some $$$$:) I expect AMD have ok cash flow from Ryzen chips to pay for this.



     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2019
    Arrrrbol, ole!!!, jclausius and 2 others like this.
  7. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,500
    Messages:
    9,403
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    431
  8. Papusan

    Papusan JOKEBOOK's Sucks! Dont waste your $$$ on FILTHY

    Reputations:
    23,010
    Messages:
    23,720
    Likes Received:
    41,212
    Trophy Points:
    931
    A new one?:D

    AMD Advertises Ryzen Pro As Capable Of Hitting 5GHz Clock Speeds
    [​IMG]
    AMD recently settled a false advertisement lawsuit with Bulldozer but looks like they might have made a marketing booboo again (jokes aside, this will probably be taken care of before it can do any damage) as the company advertises Ryzen PRO as capable of hitting 5GHz clock speeds. As we know (and as AMD’s official website confirms) this is not the case and unless you are using LN2, you will not get 5GHz out of the box with the Ryzen PRO processors. I am not entirely sure how this got past legal as they are usually pretty vigilant about these things but I have reached out to the company and am currently waiting for a response.


    The promo in question can be found on AMD’s official YouTube page and shows 5GHz clock speeds at the 1:34 timestamp. Considering Ryzen PRO cannot hit 5GHz turbo (even on a single core basis) without using LN2, this is something that would probably be considered false advertisement. Although hopefully, AMD would be able to take this video down as soon as possible. The complete video (which might have been taken down by the time this article goes live) can be found below:

     
    hmscott, TANWare and Arrrrbol like this.
  9. Arrrrbol

    Arrrrbol Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    3,052
    Messages:
    709
    Likes Received:
    1,034
    Trophy Points:
    156
    AMD really need to get their marketing team in line, they've been coming out with some real stinkers lately.
     
    hmscott and Papusan like this.
  10. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,500
    Messages:
    9,403
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    431
    They can easily set internally the boost to 5 GHz but like other present Ryzen's it does not mean it will hit it.
     
Loading...

Share This Page