AMD Updates Roadmap, Toronto to Feature Dual IMC

[Fulgrim]

 

The Toronto APU and CPU are part of the AMD Opteron platform and are going to feature Excavator cores. A previously leaked roadmap showed that the Toronto SoCs will either support DDR3 or DDR4 memory, but now it would appear that they are going to support both thanks to Dual IMCs (Integrated Memory Controller). AMD has previously steered clear of DDR4 memory partly because the Industry hasn’t grown accustomed to it and partly because it costs an arm and a leg. However, they seemed to have reversed that decision. The Opteron platform currently houses the Berlin APU and Toronto is the successor of the same with the next revision of Bulldozer architecture. Both the APU and CPUs will have 4 x86 Excavator cores.

 

Carrizo was supposed to have DDR4 Memory but this was abandoned (according to latest reports) due to the high cost of the memory in question. So why has AMD decided to give Toronto processors this benefit? Well the reasoning is simple. Even though DDR4 is expensive, the expense only applies to consumer markets. Server markets exist on a very strict cost and value model and only the relative expense per performance increase matters to them. Simply put, the Server Market would be indifferent to the expense that DDR4 entails. Another factor is the fact that DDR4 memory can support higher memory densities while having lower power consumption than DDR3. These two factors are once again something very important for the server markets that operate on a Performance-Per-Watt model. Finally, this would make the Toronto APUs and CPUs future proof for when DDR4 does become cheaper than DDR3 (around 2016). The source is also hopeful that we will be seeing stacked DRAM on the Mobility platform of Carrizo APU as well, something which should have very positive effects on the performance of the next gen APU.

 

 

Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-toronto-apu-feature-dual-imc-ddr3-ddr4-supported/#ixzz39HAa0b7R

[Askew]

[mr moose]

Is it even viable to put two memory controllers in one die?

[GlassBomb]

That picture is literally from back in November 2013.

 

I'm sorry, but I really can't take WCCF seriously. Until I hear from AMD themselves, I wont believe much.

[Glenwing]

Is it even viable to put two memory controllers in one die?

They've done it before with Phenom II chips that supported both DDR2 and DDR3.

While supporting as many things as possible is cool, I always felt the dual memory controller thing was a bit of a waste. It's a jack of all trades but master of none type of design. I'd rather have seen a quad-channel DDR3 or quad-channel DDR4 controller than a dual-channel controller for each one, considering QC DDR3 would be equal in bandwidth to DC DDR4. Or they could have simply used the die space for something else to improve performance or yields. Not only is it wasted die space, but it's wasted board space. Last time this happened boards were designed with two DDR2 slots and two DDR3 slots. Whichever one you pick you were limited to two DIMMs which is annoying, and putting eight DIMM slots puts severe limits on the VRM assembly design without resorting to E-ATX. Plus, you can never ever have all your DIMM slots fully populated which might annoy people aesthetically. Of course board vendors could just pick one or the other and put four slots of one type and ignore the other, but again... Wasted die space.

[GlassBomb]

Is it even viable to put two memory controllers in one die?

They've done it before with Phenom II chips that supported both DDR2 and DDR3

I still have an old Socket 775 that supports both DDR2 and DDR3. Though, overclocking stopped working when I tried DDR3, and I couldn't update the bios.

[Askew]

They've done it before with Phenom II chips that supported both DDR2 and DDR3.

While supporting as many things as possible is cool, I always felt the dual memory controller thing was a bit of a waste. It's a jack of all trades but master of none type of design. I'd rather have seen a quad-channel DDR3 or quad-channel DDR4 controller than a dual-channel controller for each one, considering QC DDR3 would be equal in bandwidth to DC DDR4. Or they could have simply used the die space for something else to improve performance or yields. Not only is it wasted die space, but it's wasted board space. Last time this happened boards were designed with two DDR2 slots and two DDR3 slots. Whichever one you pick you were limited to two DIMMs which is annoying, and putting eight DIMM slots puts severe limits on the VRM assembly design without resorting to E-ATX. Plus, you can never ever have all your DIMM slots fully populated which might annoy people aesthetically. Of course board vendors could just pick one or the other and put four slots of one type and ignore the other, but again... Wasted die space.

 

That's very interesting, I didn't know that CPUs/motherboards existed that supported DDR2 and DDR3.

 

What reason is there for supporting multiple standards? From your post it looks like there are several cons, what are the pros?

I can't see it being just so that people could re-use old DDR2 sticks, and of course DDR2 and DDR3 DIMM slots are physically different unlike SATA/PCIE/USB revisions.

 

[Sharkyx1]

I think the important thing to look at here is Toronto. 8 core excavator desktop CPUs

Disregard this. 4 cores, not modules

[Opcode]

That's very interesting, I didn't know that CPUs/motherboards existed that supported DDR2 and DDR3.

 

What reason is there for supporting multiple standards? From your post it looks like there are several cons, what are the pros?

I can't see it being just so that people could re-use old DDR2 sticks, and of course DDR2 and DDR3 DIMM slots are physically different unlike SATA/PCIE/USB revisions.

 

Phenom II ran in both AM2+ and AM3 sockets. So the chip supported what the motherboard accommodated.

[nicehat]

They've done it before with Phenom II chips that supported both DDR2 and DDR3.

While supporting as many things as possible is cool, I always felt the dual memory controller thing was a bit of a waste. It's a jack of all trades but master of none type of design. I'd rather have seen a quad-channel DDR3 or quad-channel DDR4 controller than a dual-channel controller for each one, considering QC DDR3 would be equal in bandwidth to DC DDR4. Or they could have simply used the die space for something else to improve performance or yields. Not only is it wasted die space, but it's wasted board space. Last time this happened boards were designed with two DDR2 slots and two DDR3 slots. Whichever one you pick you were limited to two DIMMs which is annoying, and putting eight DIMM slots puts severe limits on the VRM assembly design without resorting to E-ATX. Plus, you can never ever have all your DIMM slots fully populated which might annoy people aesthetically. Of course board vendors could just pick one or the other and put four slots of one type and ignore the other, but again... Wasted die space.

 

Alot of what you are saying are valid concerns for end client users or PC enthusiasts. But lets face it, this is for the opteron line. Better compatibility = better versatility = better bottom line. I assume that you can plop this CPU on a board that supports DDR2 or DDR3 instead of a board with intercompatible DIMMS. This way you get the best savings with what you have on hand

[salminsh]

That's very interesting, I didn't know that CPUs/motherboards existed that supported DDR2 and DDR3.

 

What reason is there for supporting multiple standards? From your post it looks like there are several cons, what are the pros?

I can't see it being just so that people could re-use old DDR2 sticks, and of course DDR2 and DDR3 DIMM slots are physically different unlike SATA/PCIE/USB revisions.

 

2 different slots

[deviant88]

Till past 2016 AMD = boredom... 

Still no new cpu's until 14/16nm finfet is ready,even then if i were to want to buy any upgrade id wait the 2nd/3rd gen of 14/16nm chips to get the best of them mature chips.

[wpirobotbuilder]

They've done it before with Phenom II chips that supported both DDR2 and DDR3.

While supporting as many things as possible is cool, I always felt the dual memory controller thing was a bit of a waste. It's a jack of all trades but master of none type of design. I'd rather have seen a quad-channel DDR3 or quad-channel DDR4 controller than a dual-channel controller for each one, considering QC DDR3 would be equal in bandwidth to DC DDR4. Or they could have simply used the die space for something else to improve performance or yields. Not only is it wasted die space, but it's wasted board space. Last time this happened boards were designed with two DDR2 slots and two DDR3 slots. Whichever one you pick you were limited to two DIMMs which is annoying, and putting eight DIMM slots puts severe limits on the VRM assembly design without resorting to E-ATX. Plus, you can never ever have all your DIMM slots fully populated which might annoy people aesthetically. Of course board vendors could just pick one or the other and put four slots of one type and ignore the other, but again... Wasted die space.

This is only with the die. They may produce multiple motherboard SKUs, some of which support DDR3 and some of which support DDR4. That way if a business transitions from DDR3 to DDR4 in the future, they can keep the same CPU.