6-core Ryzen processors technically possible

[Levis95l]

A few days back we heard a rumour that there was not going to be a 6-core sku of Ryzen. There's a post about it here.

I among other people speculated that it would be due to Ryzen's 4-cores/module architecture.

 

A few hours ago a Finnish tech news site io-tech.fi published an article claiming that there is no technical limitation for 6-core Ryzen processors to exist.

 

Translated from Finnish (by me):

Quote

io-tech.fi has confirmed from its own sources that for a 100% certainty the rumour in question is not correct.

EDIT: "The rumour in question" being that the CXX (CPU complex) in Zen architecture would limit the possible core configurations to 4 and 8. I wan't to be clear on that they did not confirm 6-core sku's existance either.

 

From the English summary in the article:

Quote

It is possible to disable each CPU core separately, together with the dedicated L2 cache, from CCX without affecting shared L3 cache. Possible L3 cache configurations are 1/1 (8 MB), 1/2 (4 MB) or completely disabled. Basic rule is that both CCXs should have similar CPU core and L3 configuration. For example both should have 3 cores and full 8 MB L3 cache enabled (6C & 16 MB L3).

 

So it seems pretty certain that at least technically there's no reason to make 6-core chips. (By disabling cores from defectice 8-core chips that is.)

I'm excited, since before it looked like there would be just a big gap between the price points of 4-cores and 8-cores.

 

Source: io-tech.fi

(The article is in Finnish but there's an English summary at the end.)

[Wolther]

People have no idea. Lets just leave it at that. 

[paddy-stone]

I thought it was almost always gonna be able to do it, just the same as other CPU/GPU binning, where they disable some parts of the silicon.. that way they are still making money from a process that they had to spend money on and haven't got to throw stuff away. But that's my laymens knowledge of binning so to speak.

[Drak3]

The fact that it's technically possible is a surprise to no one who knows where most of the SKUs for x86 processors, and some GPU SKUs come from.

 

I mean:

Celerons and Pentiums are now just made by cutting back defective i3's.

i5's are made by cutting back defective quadcore i7's.

The lower core count i7 Extreme Editions are just defective higher core count i7 Extreme Editions.

The Phenom x3 lineup was made of both defective Phenom x4's and fully functional Phenom x4's (just to meet demand).

The RX470's GPU is made from the defective GPU that would have been the RX480.

The locked SKU i7, i5, and i3's are binned and don't clock well past their clock speeds, at least as far as Intel QC is concerned.

[Bananasplit_00]

5 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

The fact that it's technically possible is a surprise to no one who knows where most of the SKUs for x86 processors, and some GPU SKUs come from.

 

I mean:

Celerons and Pentiums are now just made by cutting back defective i3's.

i5's are made by cutting back defective quadcore i7's.

The lower core count i7 Extreme Editions are just defective higher core count i7 Extreme Editions.

The Phenom x3 lineup was made of both defective Phenom x4's and fully functional Phenom x4's (just to meet demand).

The RX470's GPU is made from the defective GPU that would have been the RX480.

The locked SKU i7, i5, and i3's are binned and don't clock well past their clock speeds, at least as far as Intel QC is concerned.

thats Intels and Radeons binning, AMD have worked with CPU cores beeing in pairs for the FX series and im pretty sure you could not disable just one core and you had to do a multiple of two. the leak this was based on was that Ryzen works in 4 core modules which now, has been debunked of this Finish site is to belive. 

 

 

well this would make me get a Ryzen chip, the hexa core was the interesting one too me always, if i decide to get myself an R9 Fury too and il be team red lol

[goodtofufriday]

7 core processors also technically possible 

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

thats Intels and Radeons binning, AMD have worked with CPU cores beeing in pairs for the FX series and im pretty sure you could not disable just one core and you had to do a multiple of two. the leak this was based on was that Ryzen works in 4 core modules which now, has been debunked of this Finish site is to belive. 

 

 

well this would make me get a Ryzen chip, the hexa core was the interesting one too me always, if i decide to get myself an R9 Fury too and il be team red lol

That's just binning, period.

 

While Bulldozer based CPUs could not have a single core easily disabled to do the module design (which calling Bulldozer's CMT design and Ryzen's 4c packaging design the same thing is stupid, they're engineered differently), that was due to the fact that some resources that don't constitute a component of a core were shared. On Ryzen, it's a SMT design, with the 4 core packages being very similar to Intel's HTT Quad cores.

 

AMD's entire idea is literally making Haswell/ Broadwell i7 equivalents that support scaling to 2 chips, on a single piece of PCB, for the consumer side.

[Levis95l]

40 minutes ago, goodtofufriday said:

7 core processors also technically possible 

According to the source not. It says that both CCX's would need to have same amount of cores and L3 cache. (So the  other module having 4 cores and the other 3 would not work.)

[RezChi]

Canard PC also claims that there is a 6C/12T no 8C/8T

 

 

[Levis95l]

40 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

That's just binning, period.

 

While Bulldozer based CPUs could not have a single core easily disabled to do the module design (which calling Bulldozer's CMT design and Ryzen's 4c packaging design the same thing is stupid, they're engineered differently), that was due to the fact that some resources that don't constitute a component of a core were shared. On Ryzen, it's a SMT design, with the 4 core packages being very similar to Intel's HTT Quad cores.

 

AMD's entire idea is literally making Haswell/ Broadwell i7 equivalents that support scaling to 2 chips, on a single piece of PCB, for the consumer side.

I don't know what limitations Intel has when disabling cores but on Ryzen you need to have the same amount of cores on both CCX's. So it's not all that simple and I fully understand that many people believed the earlier rumour.

[Levis95l]

2 minutes ago, RezChi said:

Canard PC also claims that there is a 6C/12T no 8C/8T

Makes sense since all the Intel processors are also hyperthreaded from 6 cores and up.

[Drak3]

5 minutes ago, Levis95l said:

I don't know what limitations Intel has when disabling cores but on Ryzen you need to have the same amount of cores on both CCX's. So it's not all that simple and I fully understand that many people believed the earlier rumour.

 

11 minutes ago, Levis95l said:

According to the source not. It says that both CCX's would need to have same amount of cores and L3 cache. (So the  other module having 4 cores and the other 3 would not work.)

That isn't verified by AMD, it's just another {meaningless} speculation. We also don't know how the firmware/microcode works the RyZen architecture, for all we know, it's possible to have only 1 core on the first module and 3 on the other, and have a working CPU.

[AlTech]

55 minutes ago, Levis95l said:

I don't know what limitations Intel has when disabling cores but on Ryzen you need to have the same amount of cores on both CCX's. So it's not all that simple and I fully understand that many people believed the earlier rumour.

Intel disabling cores on Ryzen? Dear oh dear.

[Doobeedoo]

Well yeah, why not. Zen is 4C block, yields are probably very good so.

[AkatsukiKun]

I would be confident that they can make dual core skus of Ryzen though, for those low power machines. Yes it's speculation again but perhaps have 3 blocks, disable half for every block to get 6 cores in total. 3 blocks = 12 cores, disable half of the blocks.

[Levis95l]

9 hours ago, Drak3 said:

 

That isn't verified by AMD, it's just another {meaningless} speculation. We also don't know how the firmware/microcode works the RyZen architecture, for all we know, it's possible to have only 1 core on the first module and 3 on the other, and have a working CPU.

Of course this is a rumour (not verified by AMD as you said). But it's more than just a speculation as well, since the writer claims it to be 100% certain information.

 

Then it's just a matter if you trust the news site. This io-tech.fi has very good reputation in staying on the facts and being never missleading. So that is why I personally believe everything in this rumour, even though we don't know their source at all.

 

Anyway, I think you can take this ruomour with a grain of salt instead of a pile of salt, unlike most of them.

[Thony]

AMD did it before, so did Intel... How can people even think it cant be done no more...

[JDMFTW]

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/now_it_looks_like_amd_will_be_releasing_6-core_amd_ryzen_cpus/1

[-BirdiE-]

I'm very interested to see the prices. Would really like to replace my 4770K with a 6 core Ryzen. Assuming all the benchmarks so far have been accurate that is..

[JDMFTW]

1 hour ago, -BirdiE- said:

I'm very interested to see the prices. Would really like to replace my 4770K with a 6 core Ryzen. Assuming all the benchmarks so far have been accurate that is..

Im in the same boat. 

Id like to see it compared to the 7700k 

[dalekphalm]

23 hours ago, Levis95l said:

According to the source not. It says that both CCX's would need to have same amount of cores and L3 cache. (So the  other module having 4 cores and the other 3 would not work.)

 

23 hours ago, Levis95l said:

I don't know what limitations Intel has when disabling cores but on Ryzen you need to have the same amount of cores on both CCX's. So it's not all that simple and I fully understand that many people believed the earlier rumour.

 

13 hours ago, Levis95l said:

Of course this is a rumour (not verified by AMD as you said). But it's more than just a speculation as well, since the writer claims it to be 100% certain information.

 

Then it's just a matter if you trust the news site. This io-tech.fi has very good reputation in staying on the facts and being never missleading. So that is why I personally believe everything in this rumour, even though we don't know their source at all.

 

Anyway, I think you can take this ruomour with a grain of salt instead of a pile of salt, unlike most of them.

First off, it's entirely possible that a translation error could make you still correct, BUT, please keep in mind that the Finnish site kept saying "SHOULD", not "has to be". Take a look:

Quote

Basic rule is that both CCXs should have similar CPU core and L3 configuration. For example both should have 3 cores and full 8 MB L3 cache enabled (6C & 16 MB L3).

Should does not mean has to have. This could mean that other configurations are possible, but undesirable due to a performance or efficiency hit. This statement does not clearly state that 7-core CPU's are impossible.

[Levis95l]

8 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

 

 

First off, it's entirely possible that a translation error could make you still correct, BUT, please keep in mind that the Finnish site kept saying "SHOULD", not "has to be". Take a look:

Should does not mean has to have. This could mean that other configurations are possible, but undesirable due to a performance or efficiency hit. This statement does not clearly state that 7-core CPU's are impossible.

Great point! The Finnish version says:

Quote

When configuring the cores the basic rule is, that the same amount of cores and L3 cache is in use in both CPU complexes.

So there is no "should", but what is that "basic rule" thing about? Is there an exception to that rule? I had completely missed that wording even though it's both Finnish and English versions. Thanks for pointing it out!

[dalekphalm]

6 hours ago, Levis95l said:

Great point! The Finnish version says:

So there is no "should", but what is that "basic rule" thing about? Is there an exception to that rule? I had completely missed that wording even though it's both Finnish and English versions. Thanks for pointing it out!

No worries. Indeed, even the original Finnish translated into English is a bit... vague.

 

As you say, "basic rule" could mean lots of things.