Is this the answer from AMD on the rumoured i9 lineup?

[Taf the Ghost]

Large scale tech companies have to be run by an Engineer with a good sense for the business aspects of the Business.  The companies live & die by proper R&D spending, regardless of the rest of the economic or business factors.

 

As for what AMD is directed towards, it's really in the APUs. I saw a good discussion that their goal seems to be really splitting the Integer & FP calculations, but to pull that off requires a lot of interconnected Tech.  The main one being the Infinity Fabric.  Given Die complexity and yield concerns going forward, it's a lot better to produce a lot of smaller dies and put them together via Infinity Fabric, rather than being ruined by Die-yield issues.

 

Think of it this way: what would happen if you toss Four RX 580s, at a lower-clock + wattage, on the same GPU, but it acts like 1 GPU? Now think of the professional Volta GPU that Nvidia showed.  Think of how insanely massive that chip had to be.  We know we're coming to real issues with die shrinks getting really hard over the next decade.  That's what Nvidia & Intel are currently running up against and why AMD's new leadership is going to be so disruptive to matters.

 

And this isn't conjecture.  Ryzen is a 2 CCX unit at production level.  Threadripper will be 4 CCX. Naples 8 CCX.  This is now a robust technology and approach.  Raven Ridge will be 1 CCX + Vega cores, which might be our first production-level resource sharing APU.  (We'll see.)  It's the approach for a team that's behind but looked into the future to map out a way of getting ahead.  It's pretty fun to watch and I hope they pull it off.  Mostly because I want to see what comes next.

[Taf the Ghost]

This approach also gets better.  It's beyond just a factory NUMA solution.  If they can add CCXs in pairs (so go from 2 to 4 to 6), once you get out to around 10, small improvements in efficiency of the fabrication process means you can drop in another pair of CCXs within your thermal limits.  This gets more important the closer we get to the physical limits for the way we produce CPUs.  And, just because we hit a final size limit doesn't mean there won't be refinements in the production process.

 

Also, the 1080 Ti is sitting at 12 billion transistors. We're hitting error-rates in production that really weren't thought possible for a long time.  The CCX approach is a brilliant hedge against that issue as well.  Along with all of the other benefits.

[Okjoek]

AMD came prepared to this fight? Should be good!

[Drak3]

11 hours ago, Ryujin2003 said:

 Not when Intel has 3 billion to spend on R&D. How the he'll are they supposed to make that back if customers expect reduced cost? Ludicrous.

Because most of Intel's R&D doesn't go to consumer CPU manufacturing anymore. They could cut the price in half, and their chips would still be very profitable.

Most of Intel's R&D goes to beefing up their current exclusive features (Thunderbolt being a big one), FPGA based system accelerators, 3D Xpoint, Server platforms, or incorporating innoivations from small/dying companies.

[Mooshi]

20 hours ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

Both companies are trying to outdo each other now which is kinda childish...

Better than Intel re-releasing the 6700k with worst thermals and dumb drm for Netflix as a selling point.

[shermantanker]

12 hours ago, Ryujin2003 said:

 Not when Intel has 3 billion to spend on R&D. How the he'll are they supposed to make that back if customers expect reduced cost? Ludicrous.

because their CPUs power 99% of the HUGE server market. They made 3 billion in the last quarter alone. They can make that back no problem with lower consumer pricing.

[XR6]

i9 and R9 will not exist. It's all rumours. Intel make people pay from 400-1000$ for an i7, and they won't make another series of high-end consumer CPUs.

The i7 lineup is too valuable for Intel to ruin with a brand new lineup..

 

 

 

[79wjd]

2 hours ago, 1kv said:

i9 and R9 will not exist. It's all rumours. Intel make people pay from 400-1000$ for an i7, and they won't make another series of high-end consumer CPUs.

The i7 lineup is too valuable for Intel to ruin with a brand new lineup..

How would renaming the HEDT i7s to i9s "ruin" anything? If anything that would make X299 CPUs sound better. 

[Valentyn]

2 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

How would renaming the HEDT i7s to i9s "ruin" anything? If anything that would make X299 CPUs sound better. 

That's what I take from it. i7 for highend consumer, and i9 for HEDT fits fine.
 

[XR6]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

How would renaming the HEDT i7s to i9s "ruin" anything? If anything that would make X299 CPUs sound better. 

Didn't know it was a rename. Sorry

 

[rattacko123]

THREADRIPPER CONFIRM

 

[Citadelen]

On 15/05/2017 at 9:21 PM, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

Both companies are trying to outdo each other now which is kinda childish...

I don't think you quite grasp the concept of competition...

[vanished]

On 5/16/2017 at 1:10 AM, Tedny said:

if 10 core Ryzen will be less than 500$, maybe will buy it for a replacement for my  E5-2690 v2 in the workstation 

Why would a 10 core be under $500 when the current 8 core is $500?

[Drak3]

30 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Why would a 10 core be under $500 when the current 8 core is $500?

Very bad clocks.

[vanished]

11 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Very bad clocks.

I suppose, but if it's bad enough that pricing it under $500 makes sense, it'll be bad enough no one would want it

[corsairian]

Amd, really? 1998x/1998, 1977x/1977, 1976? My brain.. It hurts. what's with those names? That's already confusing as hell. I hope these arent real lol. 

 

I hope AMD can bring something really competitive to the table. That's what we need. HEDT from both sides is something I've wanted for a while. 

[marldorthegreat]

On 5/15/2017 at 9:21 PM, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

Both companies are trying to outdo each other now which is kinda childish...

Its good, its competition. THIS is what the cpu market has needed for about 10 years, AMD now competes across all of intel's cpus.

[Foxxer]

Wow. 

[NTDaws]

I think it would be cool if we had dual socket gaming boards for Ryzen. Probably not gonna happen. But it's smart imo.

[79wjd]

5 minutes ago, Being Delirious said:

I think it would be cool if we had dual socket gaming boards for Ryzen. Probably not gonna happen. But it's smart imo.

Dual socket gaming boards.....For what reason? No games can use that many cores and the latency would be a complete disaster.

[NTDaws]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

Dual socket gaming boards.....For what reason? No games can use that many cores and the latency would be a complete disaster.

More so for fun, cores help with video editing

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, Being Delirious said:

More so for fun, cores help with video editing

Not in Adobe Premiere/After Effects

[NTDaws]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

Not in Adobe Premiere/After Effects

Not premiere but other programs. 

[Jito463]

36 minutes ago, Being Delirious said:

I think it would be cool if we had dual socket gaming boards for Ryzen. Probably not gonna happen. But it's smart imo.

29 minutes ago, Being Delirious said:

More so for fun, cores help with video editing

 

Video editing and gaming are two very different things.

[NTDaws]

1 minute ago, Jito463 said:

 

Video editing and gaming are two very different things.

So are strawberries and mushrooms.