AMD Remains Competitive: Zen 3 Announced

[5x5]

41 minutes ago, maartendc said:

Wait, so are we getting an iteration of Zen 2 like Zen 2+ first?

 

Or are they going straight to a new architecture with Zen 3?

 

Is Zen 3 supposed to be released in 2020?

No Zen2+, Zen3 next year.

[cj09beira]

19 hours ago, Zando Bob said:

Will be interesting to see if they can push higher clocks. AFAIK Zen 2's IPC is actually a good bit better than Intel's, Intel chips stay on a level or slightly higher in many things due to a higher clock ceiling, but Ryzens give them an extremely hard fight and take home a few wins at 300-500Mhz lower clocks. If they had the clock headroom Intel CPUs do, there wouldn't really be any competition performance wise for most tasks. 

with amd probably going the interposer and hbm route pretty soon, i dont expect them to be able to clock much higher, heat density is already a really big problem, so unless they can increase tjmax to increase heat transfer i dont see clocks increasing much, now gate all around fets might help with this by reducing power per transistor but intel should also be working on that,

[maartendc]

27 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

with amd probably going the interposer and hbm route pretty soon, i dont expect them to be able to clock much higher, heat density is already a really big problem, so unless they can increase tjmax to increase heat transfer i dont see clocks increasing much, now gate all around fets might help with this by reducing power per transistor but intel should also be working on that,

But they are producing on a new 7nm+ node, so they should be able to take some advantage of power savings / efficiency improvement?

 

Doesn't 10% better efficiency mean 10% better clocks theoretically, all things being equal? Or is it not that simple?

[hollyh88]

22 hours ago, Fasauceome said:

Ever since Intel promised a neat 18% IPC improvement for their 10 nanometer CPUs, there was probably some worry that it would take AMD a while to catch up in single threaded once more. However, while many thought that Zen 2 + was going to be the next architecture (following in the steps of Zen and Zen +) AMD has confirmed that a new generational microarchitecture is on the way:

https://wccftech.com/amd-zen-3-new-cpu-architecture-significant-ipc-gains-higher-clocks/amp/

There was no exact performance uplift cited, as that is par for the course for something so far from release. I don't expect the huge IPC improvements that made Zen 2 so incredibly competitive against Intel, but I expect it to be meaningful enough that it will remain the best performance for the dollar (unless Intel decides to change their pricing structure drastically.)

 

These chipswill be manufactured on the 7nm+ node from tsmc which means that they'll have a lot of improved density and whatnot.

And that's what I love most about Ryzen, the power efficiency.

 

And let's not forget about epyc

 

But let's move on past the stuff we expect, what's new?

A very important distinction is being made here. It's being implied that the 15% IPC improvement from Zen 2 was kind of chump change, and that maybe the switch to Zen 3, which is going to be fundamentally different, is going to offer so much more in terms of a performance leap. this doesn't surprise me, as the seven nanometer node probably has a ton more potential yet to come.

Just had to take a brief moment to shit on Intel real quick, lel.

 

My hope:

They adopt "Zen 5" and skip Zen 4 if they go to a new socket and do Ryzen 5000, that way the leading generation number matches up with the microarchitecture identifier and everything becomes easier.

i just want the 600 series part to then have 8 cores instead of 6. a 4600/x with 8 cores and 16 threads would be dope  

[Fasauceome]

1 minute ago, hollyh88 said:

i just want the 600 series part to then have 8 cores instead of 6. a 4600/x with 8 cores and 16 threads would be dope  

Quad cores aren't obsolete just yet, I don't think replacing the Ryzen 3 lineup with 6 core parts will help their product stack. 

 

Yeah 8 cores on the cutting edge node for $200 would be sick as hell, but it's also a bit too idealistic.

[porina]

On 11/19/2019 at 2:59 PM, Fasauceome said:

A very important distinction is being made here. It's being implied that the 15% IPC improvement from Zen 2 was kind of chump change, and that maybe the switch to Zen 3, which is going to be fundamentally different, is going to offer so much more in terms of a performance leap. this doesn't surprise me, as the seven nanometer node probably has a ton more potential yet to come.

Process and architecture aren't necessarily related in that way... process may enable better architecture by allowing you to throw more transistors at it though. I remain sceptical as to how much future improvement is possible (without running more threads) but Zen 2 was certainly better than I expected in that area.

 

On 11/19/2019 at 3:19 PM, That Franc said:

I need a 65 watt chip, and I don't need that many cores for what I do, so 3700X is more than enough for me. (I'd rather get a better graphics card because Resolve really loves CUDA cores, apparently)

Zen 2 CPUs start at 88W for 65W TDP models. If it has to be 65W, you need either ECO mode or other customisation to running state.

 

Also a 16 core 65W CPU will generally be faster than a 65W 8 core CPU. Why? If you running low threads, the power budget isn't really affected. If you're running all threads, running more cores in the same power budget means each has to take less. In general, power goes down faster than clock, so more performance per watt. 

 

10 hours ago, Ratisbona said:

Not even close. I did that experiment a few weeks ago on my 3900X. I downclocked it to about 3700-3800MHz fixed and undervolted it to 0.975V or something like that, to make it draw as close as I could get it to 65 W. And it still got over 2800 points in Cinebench.

There is an easy way to do this, just set the PPT limit to the max power you want. The CPU will just operate at a more efficient point in the curve to make it happen. You might get better with a manual voltage/clock adjust, but there is more risk there as to stability under different workloads. I think power limit is the best way with Zen 2 to alter CPU behaviour as it is getting to the point that a single manually set voltage/clock can't be best in all scenarios.

[hollyh88]

22 hours ago, Fasauceome said:

Quad cores aren't obsolete just yet, I don't think replacing the Ryzen 3 lineup with 6 core parts will help their product stack. 

 

Yeah 8 cores on the cutting edge node for $200 would be sick as hell, but it's also a bit too idealistic.

i mean quad cores arent going to last long with newer big titles needing more cores. sure you always have the ones that still do fine on 4 cores but not all of them. I could 100% see them do such a thing. it will only help them gain even more %  with lower end hardware users. and midrange/high end well 8 cores for around 200 wouldnt even mind paying 250 would be amazing. It would mean that you could use that cpu for a long time as a gamer well at least if the performance numbers hold up. I would love to see the 4000 series at least be able to come close to 5.0. i mean the 3600 could do 4.3 so its getting there  

[cj09beira]

On 11/20/2019 at 11:56 AM, maartendc said:

But they are producing on a new 7nm+ node, so they should be able to take some advantage of power savings / efficiency improvement?

 

Doesn't 10% better efficiency mean 10% better clocks theoretically, all things being equal? Or is it not that simple?

usually the nodes are measured at close to their peak efficiency, which usually means around were the cpus have their base clocks, so those can see 10% increase while at the top it could have no improvement at all or a small one

[Fasauceome]

3 minutes ago, ONOTech said:

With the rumored i3 10100 (hideous name btw), I think AMD will make the Ryzen 3 line-up 4C8T and the Athlons 4C/4T.

would they though? They intentionally left room below the Ryzen 5 X600 to add more products, and they offer 4C/8T parts that are just on the last gen architecture. If anything they would just make the 4500G a Zen 3 part instead of Zen 2 to compete with that, as well as probably expand parts like the Ryzen 5 3500 in the US

 

AMD has a lot more options than just getting rid of lower core count parts.

[Doobeedoo]

So great to see each gen be a very good improvement. Really neat to see this momentum on a yearly basis. 

[The_Adeo]

On 11/19/2019 at 4:55 PM, Mira Yurizaki said:

I lowered the voltage of my Ryzen 2700X and capped the maximum speed to 4GHz from 4.3GHz. While that sounds silly at first glance, the 4.3GHz maximum boost was only possible on a handful of cores and when running a sustained workload test, undervolting and capping the speed allowed the processor to sustain it for over half an hour. At stock settings, the processor was chugging down near base clocks within 20-25 minutes.

Hey man, how did you undervolt your 2700X? Did you choose a fixed voltage, a voltage offset or some strange technique? I'd love to know because I'd like to do the same on my 2700X

[Mira Yurizaki]

6 hours ago, hollyh88 said:

i mean quad cores arent going to last long with newer big titles needing more cores. sure you always have the ones that still do fine on 4 cores but not all of them.

If you go with the mindset of a gamer or someone who crunches videos, then sure. But most people who use computers are likely checking email, streaming videos, or going on social media. A phone can do this.

 

2 hours ago, The_Adeo said:

Hey man, how did you undervolt your 2700X? Did you choose a fixed voltage, a voltage offset or some strange technique? I'd love to know because I'd like to do the same on my 2700X

I used a fixed voltage. ~1.25V is the minimum I found on my CPU when capping the maximum speed to 4.0 GHz.

[hollyh88]

31 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

If you go with the mindset of a gamer or someone who crunches videos, then sure. But most people who use computers are likely checking email, streaming videos, or going on social media. A phone can do this.

well we talk about gaming. someone that does anything else is fine with 4 cores xd but for gaming? ill even go and say this : within 1.5 years minimum is 6 cores and the new middleroad is 8.