Does chiplet limit clock speed potential?

[e22big]

Just another topic for a fun discussion. I've noticed that AMD Ryzen series with chiplet design seems to have a very limited overclock potential and also using quite a high voltate power out of the box. Is it possible that AMD chiplet, by its very nature, limit its potenial to be clock way higher and deliver substantial more performance at the cost of heat and power just like how Intel did with their Alder Lake? 

 

Since both Intel and Nvidia seems to prefer craking power to deliver consumer the maximum performance, it's only logical that AMD did the same at least to some of their product to improve their competitive posittion but they had never done it even now. So I wonder if they are limited by the physical nature of their chip in some form.

 

 

 

[Somerandomtechyboi]

Cpu oc has been dead since 9th gen cause oc potential has dropped alot on both sides, ofc amd being the worst in terms of oc ability

 

On intel youd prob only expect 5.1-5.3g on normal cooling which is pretty pathetic considering the boost clocks

[Kilrah]

OC potential is very limited everywhere now. Manufacturers finally figured out how to not have to leave 30% of untapped performance margin on their parts but ship them already close to the limit.

[e22big]

9 minutes ago, Kilrah said:

OC potential is very limited everywhere now. Manufacturers finally figured out how to not have to leave 30% of untapped performance margin on their parts but ship them already close to the limit.

Yeah, which is why I spesifically mentioned clock speed and not OC potential. 

 

I mean based on my discussion with people here from last time, Intel Alder Lake is basically factory OC to the max so that it can beat Ryzen 500. We don't see AMD doing the same thing with their new generation chip (well not likely anyway), hence the question. Maybe they just can't crank the chip up to 180w and expect the same gain as Intel.

[Kilrah]

I mean the architecture is completely different, there's nothing that can be compared just with absolute clock numbers anyway or that could be pinpointed as "just because of the fact they're chiplets".

If anything in theory being small chiplets should allow for higher clocks than a big monolithic chip, but obviously there's way more to it than such a simplistic approach.

[YoungBlade]

Considering that Zen 3 can be pushed to 5.1GHz, I don't think chiplets limit clockspeed potential in-and-of-themselves. It just to time for the Zen architecture to mature.

[Stahlmann]

It's impossible for us to say what exactly makes it so AMD CPUs generally clock lower. But clocks alone don't mean anything either way. I personally don't look at clocks, cores chache or really any specs. I just look at reviews to see how they stack up, where the point of diminishing returns is etc.

[e22big]

2 hours ago, Kilrah said:

I mean the architecture is completely different, there's nothing that can be compared just with absolute clock numbers anyway or that could be pinpointed as "just because of the fact they're chiplets".

If anything in theory being small chiplets should allow for higher clocks than a big monolithic chip, but obviously there's way more to it than such a simplistic approach.

Power does though, you could say that Ryzen 5 ghz isn't the same as Intel 5 ghz - but at least up to this point, they doesn't seem to be able to push the power enveolop off the windows and got performance increases like Intel on the CPU side. I guess that's a better way to phase the question, the main point is whether chiplet is the obstacle in making their chip running stable at 200w and got some good degree of scaling out of it compare to just a hundread or so watt. 

 

It get me wonder because let's say AMD no longer have TSMC node advantage due to Intel catching up (hypothetically), would sticking to chiplet actually put them at a disadvantage because a monolithic design allows you clock the chip way higher as long as you can cool it. Can't think of a reason why but so far it seems to be the case.

 

[Kilrah]

Again I don't think it's got anything to do with "being chiplets", just other differences. Node size would probably be a main one. AMD chips are on a smaller node, so the chips are smaller, so they're harder to cool - but that also makes them draw less overall, so... lower power, regardless of chiplet/monolithic.

 

Higher power is never something you want, it's something you may need...