'Blasphemy!' says Intel (kind of) as they attack AMD using Zen 2 cores in a 7000 series chip

[filpo]

1 hour ago, jagdtigger said:

 

Noted, added to original post

[Poinkachu]

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

If I were AMD, I would call all upcoming Zen5 CPUs 16th gen to battle any possible confusion with older architectures.

Ryzen 5 (7/9) 16th Gen

Hmm... well, it is shorter and easier than 7525416124571225u or 7547815248715418h

[Fnige]

11 hours ago, Fnige said:

The naming scheme for laptops that AMD has is shit but I honestly cant think of a better naming scheme without going down the path of "x cpus shouldnt exist". 

 

The only actual thing I can think of that would make things better would be some way to better tell the user "oh this is a zen 2 part". Like maybe having some indicator on the sticker or something. But then I dont think the average user knows what a "Zen 2" means so...

Now that I'm not sleepy, swapping the segment and architecture number around might work better. i.e. 7250u instead of 7520u. I guess it'd be fine but idk if I'd call it great

[starsmine]

Bruh

that babco website.

[ajp_anton]

I don't find the concept of AMD's naming confusing or misleading at all. Using older architectures for their low-end chips makes complete sense, because they are cheaper to manufacture. The thing that makes them "new" is that they aren't rebadges of old chips, they are new chips on a new node, just using an architecture that results in smaller cores.

 

As long as they are marketed as being low-end, or according to what their actual performance ends up being, it's completely fine. I mean, how would you name them? A chip on a modern node using modern IO, just with an older architecture that has been shrunk to that modern node.

 

GPUs is a bit different, as they need to support certain features and they need drivers. AMD moving Vega to "legacy" status is something to complain about, because they are still putting it into new products. And selling a new product that doesn't support modern features should also be clearly communicated in the name. A CPU doesn't have features in the sense that a user would notice, as all executables are still compatible. The lack of some instruction sets will just result in poorer performance, but that's what the second digit in the name already tells you. Missing out on actual GPU features is harder to explain.

[LAwLz]

On 12/12/2023 at 5:50 PM, ajp_anton said:

The thing that makes them "new" is that they aren't rebadges of old chips, they are new chips on a new node, just using an architecture that results in smaller cores.

In many (all?) cases, they are not on a new node. 

The 7730U is TSMC N7. 

The 7440U is on TSMC N4. 

 

They keep the same old manufacturing node and architecture. 

The fact that you seem to have made this incorrect assumption is kind of proof that their naming is misleading, no?

[starsmine]

19 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

In many (all?) cases, they are not on a new node. 

The 7730U is TSMC N7. 

The 7440U is on TSMC N4. 

 

They keep the same old manufacturing node and architecture. 

The fact that you don't know this kind of proof that they are misleading. 

its only Barcilo-R that is on N7 (the 7030)
7035, or Rembrandt-R didn't change nodes either but its N6, but lets be honest, you couldn't find Rembrandt to begin with before at reasonable prices. 


7040 was completely new with the 7000. 
7020 is on a new node for the archeture.
7045 is also completely new being mobile versions of the desktop chips. 

[LAwLz]

10 hours ago, starsmine said:

its only Barcilo-R that is on N7 (the 7030)
7035, or Rembrandt-R didn't change nodes either but its N6, but lets be honest, you couldn't find Rembrandt to begin with before at reasonable prices. 


7040 was completely new with the 7000. 
7020 is on a new node for the archeture.
7045 is also completely new being mobile versions of the desktop chips. 

There is no need to defend the very confusing lineup of chips in the mobile 7000 series.

The fact that someone in this very thread, who claimed that things weren't confusing, was led to make incorrect assumptions is proof in and of itself that the naming is very hard to follow.

 

 

You need to study and read up on how the naming scheme for this specific generation of processors worked in order to understand it, because it's completely unique and doesn't match anything else, not even AMD's other lineups. It's very easy to fool yourself into thinking something is clear and obvious when you already have done the studying to understand it. I think that's what is happening in this thread.

AMD wouldn't have been handing out "decoder wheels" to tech-press if everything was simple and self-explanatory.

 

 

The problem is that the Ryzen 7000 series consists of 4 different CPU generations, 3 different GPU generations, and 4 different manufacturing processes, and various combinations of them.

Things would have been far easier to name if they had cut down on some of the variables and made the lineup more homogenous. But they didn't want that because they wanted to keep selling some of their old chips like the 5825U but make it sound new, so they renamed it to the 7730U. 

 

I think a big part of the confusion stems from the fact that there are so much old "stuff" included in these "new" chips, and the third number being in some ways more signifncant than the second number. That results in things like the the 7530U sharing more similarities with the 7730U than it does with the 7540U.

7530U and 7540U sound like they are basically the same chip, but in reality, they have a different core architecture, different GPU architecture, and different manufacturing nodes to mention some of the big differences.

 

 

[Stahlmann]

The funniest thing about all this the the absolute lack of self awareness. Pretty much everything they accuse AMD of was done - and in most cases is still done - by Intel.

[igormp]

On 12/20/2023 at 7:42 AM, LAwLz said:

There is no need to defend the very confusing lineup of chips in the mobile 7000 series.

The fact that someone in this very thread, who claimed that things weren't confusing, was led to make incorrect assumptions is proof in and of itself that the naming is very hard to follow.

 

 

You need to study and read up on how the naming scheme for this specific generation of processors worked in order to understand it, because it's completely unique and doesn't match anything else, not even AMD's other lineups. It's very easy to fool yourself into thinking something is clear and obvious when you already have done the studying to understand it. I think that's what is happening in this thread.

AMD wouldn't have been handing out "decoder wheels" to tech-press if everything was simple and self-explanatory.

 

 

The problem is that the Ryzen 7000 series consists of 4 different CPU generations, 3 different GPU generations, and 4 different manufacturing processes, and various combinations of them.

Things would have been far easier to name if they had cut down on some of the variables and made the lineup more homogenous. But they didn't want that because they wanted to keep selling some of their old chips like the 5825U but make it sound new, so they renamed it to the 7730U. 

 

I think a big part of the confusion stems from the fact that there are so much old "stuff" included in these "new" chips, and the third number being in some ways more signifncant than the second number. That results in things like the the 7530U sharing more similarities with the 7730U than it does with the 7540U.

7530U and 7540U sound like they are basically the same chip, but in reality, they have a different core architecture, different GPU architecture, and different manufacturing nodes to mention some of the big differences.

 

 

Agreed that it's hella confusing.

 

But on the other hand, since they really want to keep selling older products, I guess this way is better for the layman consumer than can just go higher number = better.

If you had people comparing the 5825U to some 7200 chip, they might think the latter is better, even if that's not the case.

The products that use older cores archs, but new node or a new iGPU also get in a weird limbo, they are new products after all and not simple refreshes.

[HenrySalayne]

14 minutes ago, igormp said:

Agreed that it's hella confusing.

 

But on the other hand, since they really want to keep selling older products, I guess this way is better for the layman consumer than can just go higher number = better.

If you had people comparing the 5825U to some 7200 chip, they might think the latter is better, even if that's not the case.

The products that use older cores archs, but new node or a new iGPU also get in a weird limbo, they are new products after all and not simple refreshes.

Is it better? I still think a 7540U is 99 out of 100 usecases better than the 7730U. The latter only having two more cores on the "better" side and thus a marginally better MC performance, but it has lower efficiency, lower clock speeds and no USB 4.0 (40 Gb/s) support. In this performance class you mostly want the 7540 U.

If they had Zen 2 for Ryzen 3, Zen 3 for Ryzen 3 and 5 parts and Zen 4 for Ryzen 5 and up parts it would have been much less confusing.

[igormp]

4 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Is it better? I still think a 7540U is 99 out of 100 usecases better than the 7730U. The latter only having two more cores on the "better" side and thus a marginally better MC performance, but it has lower efficiency, lower clock speeds and no USB 4.0 (40 Gb/s) support. In this performance class you mostly want the 7540 U.

Then it's even more confusing than I thought lmao

[HumdrumPenguin]

This presentation is so out of touch with literally anything, that I wonder how the marketing team didn't flip over so much bullshit coming from whomever is giving the shots (or maybe they did...).