AMD could be developing a 24-core/48-thread Ryzen 9 7950X CPU w/ a TDP of 170 W & up to 5.4GHz CPU clocks (Updated)

[Arika]

1 hour ago, Senzelian said:

Competition is fun.

I just wish we'd see that competition more in the lower and mid range products. You know, the parts people will actually buy.

[GhostRoadieBL]

Seems like I should start checking refrigerant supplier stocks when next gen launches, going to be alot of sweaty computer rooms.

[Ultraforce]

8 hours ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

Summary

AMD's next-gen Zen 4-based Ryzen 7000 series CPUs could have flagship 24-core, 48-thread monster at 5.4GHz with Ryzen 9 7950X. A Chinese seller on Weibo has revealed the spec sheet of the Ryzen 7000 series, which includes a 24 core/48 thread option. 

 However, it does make sense considering that Raptor Lake is planning on going up to 24c

Am I wrong or would that mean that the flagship is comparable a bit to threadrippers?

[igormp]

3 minutes ago, Ultraforce said:

Am I wrong or would that mean that the flagship is comparable a bit to threadrippers?

Still lacks quad channel memory and the extra PCIe lanes, but other than that the top end ryzen chips are similar to the lower end TRs (12c/24t and 16c/32t).

[Quackers101]

2 hours ago, Arika S said:

I just wish we'd see that competition more in the lower and mid range products. You know, the parts people will actually buy.

for CPUs there can be or if region prices are not great.

wish better GPU prices and better low end price competition, so pricey for GPUs that still struggle with recent titles. (not their fault but yeah).

[BiG StroOnZ]

18 minutes ago, Ultraforce said:

Am I wrong or would that mean that the flagship is comparable a bit to threadrippers?

 

As igormp mentioned mainstream Ryzen will still lack PCIe lanes and octa-channel memory, but there's also a possibility that to have better market segmentation that the next-gen (Zen 4) Threadripper CPUs offer higher core options compared to mainstream. 

[Brooksie359]

9 hours ago, Ydfhlx said:

Truth is that very few people care about low power usage. That's because most generally want the most performance a chip can deliver - if one chip is 10% faster at same price it will sell better even if it uses twice the power - see 12900KS vs 5950X. In other words, I consider these chips to be kinda factory OC.

 

Also, that 170W is likely while using 24 cores. It's not really a lot IMO considering Intel's been pushing out 8-core CPUs with 125W theoretical TDP, and considering 12900K too, which has 8 performance cores but pulls well over 200W.

 

Besides, if you care about power usage, then just underclock this chip to 4.8, where you'll loose probably less than 10% of performance, and undervolt. You'll probably get it to under 100W all core.

I would have to disagree. The truth is that the only people who don't care about how much power the cpu draws are the type of person who wants the best of the best no matter what which tbh is niche market when comparing number of sales to other cpus that are midrange cpus and use much less power. Personally I would rather get a i7 or an i5 and save a ton on power usage while also getting basically the same performance. What I would agree with is that most people who buy halo products are the ones that will also buy crazy cooling systems as well and probably aren't too worried by power draw. 

[TOMPPIX]

It's time to start buying Intel, amd has gone full circle. The price of a 6 core is way too high.

[RejZoR]

21 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

It's time to start buying Intel, amd has gone full circle. The price of a 6 core is way too high.

And you know it's not worth it based on what metric? Price alone? Also it's whole new platform with whole new DDR5 memory and if rumors are to be believed, these will be very fast CPUs.

[Dabombinable]

11 hours ago, leadeater said:

If you want a low power CPU then buy a low power CPU, they exist 

 

And I do mean from Intel, and I don't mean Atom.

 

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/134601/intel-core-i912900t-processor-30m-cache-up-to-4-90-ghz.html

i7 3770s vs i5 3570K. My brother commented on how his computer was noticeably cooler (and much better at gaming). 
 

The T series TBH seems more aimed at OEM with no thermal headroom in their designs.

[Rauten]

Could we please also get a couple more cores throughout the entire product stack?

Pretty please?

 

It'd be pretty cool for any potential R3 CPUs (if they ever deign to release any...) to be either half-a-CCD 6 cores (7300X) or 2-quarters-CCDs 3+3s (7100), and the R5s to be either 66% single CCD 8 core (7600X) or two 1/3-CCDs 4+4 (7500).

Wishful thinking and all that... though I guess it'll also depend on TSMC's yields and error rates.

[RejZoR]

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

If you want a low power CPU then buy a low power CPU, they exist 

 

And I do mean from Intel, and I don't mean Atom.

 

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/134601/intel-core-i912900t-processor-30m-cache-up-to-4-90-ghz.html

Then again, nothing is stopping you from defining throttling temperature or TDP limit. I've set my 5800X to 65°C thermal throttle limit and it ran at 65°C at all times no matter the load, it was as high as it would go. Then it was all down to cooling. If it removed heat better, it clocked higher. TDP limit is much more strict as it'll just stop at that power limit even if you cool it with liquid nitrogen. But it gives interesting flexibility to powerful CPU's as you can tune them to lose minimal framerate in games, but make them super power efficient and cooler.

[porina]

33 minutes ago, Rauten said:

It'd be pretty cool for any potential R3 CPUs (if they ever deign to release any...) to be either half-a-CCD 6 cores (7300X) or 2-quarters-CCDs 3+3s (7100), and the R5s to be either 66% single CCD 8 core (7600X) or two 1/3-CCDs 4+4 (7500).

Anyone got a source to 12 core CCDs? So far I've only seen some posts on this thread mentioning it. I've even had a quick poke around looking for rumours but all I found are trash generic speculative sites with practically zero info on them.

[TOMPPIX]

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Also it's whole new platform with whole new DDR5 memory

Good point. 

[HenrySalayne]

12 hours ago, igormp said:

Also, I find it stupid that the only options are either "low power" (which are not as low power as previous CPUs), or either extremely power hungry.

 

There used to be a market for low power models, regular models that could be cooled and even OC'ed with a simple air cooler, and then the extremely high-end, high power consumption models for enthusiasts, but it seems that most CPUs nowadays are slowly creeping towards that last option with nothing in between.

You could get any chip and just undervolt it. So I don't really see any problems for enthusiasts.
Why should a company sell cheap low-power chips that you can overclock to match the top of the line products?

[Rauten]

19 minutes ago, porina said:

Anyone got a source to 12 core CCDs? So far I've only seen some posts on this thread mentioning it. I've even had a quick poke around looking for rumours but all I found are trash generic speculative sites with practically zero info on them.

Not me. I was basically daydreaming based on @leadeaterpointing they might be 12core CCDs.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Dabombinable said:

i7 3770s vs i5 3570K. My brother commented on how his computer was noticeably cooler (and much better at gaming). 
 

The T series TBH seems more aimed at OEM with no thermal headroom in their designs.

Yep that's what the T are, non-K is just the normal but variants like T are actual purpose low power models. There's a few different kinds of low power models, some no longer used though.

 

But anyone can install Intel XTU and make their CPU low power or lower power, ignoring the silicon binning it's just PL configuration settings which can be done on any Intel CPU. Don't want your CPU to use more than 87W then just configure that.

[igormp]

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

You could get any chip and just undervolt it. So I don't really see any problems for enthusiasts.

That's not a problem for enthusiasts indeed, but my point wasn't geared towards them, specially since they represent less than 1% of the buyers.

 

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

Why should a company sell cheap low-power chips that you can overclock to match the top of the line products?

Maybe I didn't get my point across: I'm not saying that they should do that, they used to do so because of limitations at the time which left many chips with some slack to OC. Now they're just slamming those CPUs out of the box, whereas I'd prefer mildly tammer settings with less than 10% perf decrease and way better thermals/power consumption for the average user.

[Doobeedoo]

Rather interesting if so. Can only imagine future TR then.

But what I'm curious to see is how they'll do 3D cache though, will it be only on some SKUs and not on initial release with regular ones. 

[Blademaster91]

14 hours ago, RejZoR said:

And you know it's not worth it based on what metric? Price alone? Also it's whole new platform with whole new DDR5 memory and if rumors are to be believed, these will be very fast CPUs.

Pricing is an important factor if AMD wants to be competitive, Intel 12th gen is better price and performance, with a higher core count, Raptor Lake is supposedly to be up to 24 cores and compatible with LGA1700 boards with DDR4.

And a new platform with DDR5 memory means its going to be more expensive, AM5 is also rumored to be DDR5 only.

[Quackers101]

2 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

And a new platform with DDR5 memory means its going to be more expensive, AM5 is also rumored to be DDR5 only.

kind of sad, as that will be further increase of price to already more expensive CPUs. + the extra charges for the motherboard which also include newer generation in other areas. PCIe 5?

[RejZoR]

14 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Pricing is an important factor if AMD wants to be competitive, Intel 12th gen is better price and performance, with a higher core count, Raptor Lake is supposedly to be up to 24 cores and compatible with LGA1700 boards with DDR4.

And a new platform with DDR5 memory means its going to be more expensive, AM5 is also rumored to be DDR5 only.

It was released 2 years after Ryzen 5000. What did you expect, that it would be worse? That's almost an impossible task after arriving 2 years after... The fact it was cheaper was probably just Intel banking on people being fed up with all the jacking up of prices because of the dumb COVID, to get people on their side on top of better performance.

[Blademaster91]

2 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

kind of sad, as that will be further increase of price to already more expensive CPUs. + the extra charges for the motherboard which also include newer generation in other areas. PCIe 5?

I agree it is kinda sad everything is getting more expensive, it seems like the days of building a PC under $1000 is gone,especially since GPU prices have went up.

And yeah PCIe 5 likely means more expensive motherboards, Intel Z690 boards are quite a bit more expensive than the previous Z590 boards.

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

It was released 2 years after Ryzen 5000. What did you expect, that it would be worse? That's almost an impossible task after arriving 2 years after... The fact it was cheaper was probably just Intel banking on people being fed up with all the jacking up of prices because of the dumb COVID, to get people on their side on top of better performance.

Well before Intel released 12th gen, their products were slightly behind in some things, although still a better value, as for Intel being cheaper they own their fabs and aren't affected by TSMC price increases.

If the prices are true for Ryzen 4, its going to have to be faster than Raptor Lake, but Intel still may have better price to performance. I know some enthusiasts don't care about price but companies aren't your friends so I don't like them getting greedy with higher prices if the leaks are real. And I think AMD keeping prices consistent is important because the price increase with Ryzen 5000 was enough and there were many complaints of AMD no longer providing a stock cooler.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

That's almost an impossible task after arriving 2 years after...

Bulldozer... 

[RejZoR]

6 hours ago, leadeater said:

Bulldozer... 

That's very different. AMD was struggling for basically entire decade at that time. Intel was only really been slightly annoyed by AMD's dominance with Ryzen 5000 which was leveled a bit with Alder Lake. While Intel's CPU's had issues and weren't spectacular they weren't really terrible either. They were just very OK.