AMD Officially Announces AMD Ryzen Threadripper CPUs For Consumers, Up to 16 Cores and 32 Threads

[Dylanc1500]

1 hour ago, cj09beira said:

what will probably happen is amd will focus on improve ipc and clocks, and keep the multi die approach as its much cheaper in so many ways, to increase cores they just trough another die at the equation 

I would hope they would strive for IPC improvements, as far clocks go if they can bump the clocks without dropping anything else that would be great. As far as clocks are concerned, I don't see them making any large jumps as they don't have as much control over the process as Intel does. 

[Dylanc1500]

1 hour ago, B-17rocks said:

 

 

This is going to happen but instead of blowing up like the death star they will win the Processor wars. Intel will only be a memory

If that happens say bye bye to AMD as well. They can't survive without x86. Intel could more then likely manage without AMD64. That was demonstrated with Itanium.

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, DocSwag said:

Skylake generally is a little higher than Haswell, maybe .1 ghz, so I'd expect 4.5 ghz or so. Definitely not hitting 5 ghz though.

Definitely less than .1GHz, the difference between Haswell OC and Skylake OC is so small, that you can't notice the difference of those few MHz with the best consumer benchmarks(with the IPC difference factored in). Basically, on the CPU side of things, Skylake only has that ~5% IPC advantage. And as I said, the Haswell 5960X, a monolithic octocore, just barely manages 4.5GHz, adding the power draw and heat output of 4 more cores, on another monolithic die, will reduce that.

Only reason I can see Threadripper hitting 4GHz is because it's an MCM and Zen is more power efficient, and sacrifices a bit on AVX, which skyrockets power draw and heat output.

[Tomsen]

25 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

If that happens say bye bye to AMD as well. They can't survive without x86. Intel could more then likely manage without AMD64. That was demonstrated with Itanium.

Yeah, they really demonstrated it with itanium, because that wasn't one of Intel historical biggest failures..

AMD will just make a native 64-bit x86 processor without any fancy SSE/AVX.

[The Benjamins]

7 minutes ago, Tomsen said:

Yeah, they really demonstrated it with itanium, because that wasn't one of Intel historical biggest failures..

AMD will just make a native 64-bit x86 processor without any fancy SSE/AVX.

at some point 32-bit will be dropped completely and AMD would no longer need a x86 license correct? or is x86 license required for AMD64 to work?

[cj09beira]

23 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

I would hope they would strive for IPC improvements, as far clocks go if they can bump the clocks without dropping anything else that would be great. As far as clocks are concerned, I don't see them making any large jumps as they don't have as much control over the process as Intel does. 

this a first generation cpu, they are probably right now as we speak looking for ways to improve clocks and bottlenecks in the design to improve ipc, if i would guess one of the things they might do is make infinity fabric speed separate from dram frequency, this time around they optimized for low power at the 3-3.6 ghz range as they wanted to be able to have very efficient server processors

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, The Benjamins said:

at some point 32-bit will be dropped completely and AMD would no longer need a x86 license correct? or is x86 license required for AMD64 to work?

32bit will probably never be dropped completely. There are tasks that don't require 64bit processing. It's the same case as with 8 and 16bit, our processors still execute with those, because there are tasks that just don't benefit from having 32bit.

These tasks don't have to be user programs either, they can be OS services.

[DocSwag]

2 hours ago, B-17rocks said:

 

 

This is going to happen but instead of blowing up like the death star they will win the Processor wars. Intel will only be a memory

Last time it happened Intel countered back and destroyed them.

 

Also, if Intel went away then guess what? Right, anti-monopoly wars would happen and AMD would split. 

 

Intel ain't going away. A $100 billion company doesn't just go away.

[Dylanc1500]

20 minutes ago, Tomsen said:

Yeah, they really demonstrated it with itanium, because that wasn't one of Intel historical biggest failures..

AMD will just make a native 64-bit x86 processor without any fancy SSE/AVX.

It wasn't a failure due to anything other than legacy x86 compatibility. 

Also you can't just make a native 64bit processor when AMD64 is an extension of x86. The extension is heavily reliant on x86 and you could not just rip them apart and call it good. Companies would be more likely to turn back to IBM architechures as they a good portion use them already.

 

I know this as I from experience dealing with x86 in an almost intimate manner. 

[AlwaysFSX]

17 hours ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

"Threadripper" is genuinely one of the worst nicknames I've ever heard.

More on topic, kinda excited to see how this turns out.

Oh I'm sure AMD can come up with worse.

[Taf the Ghost]

33 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

this a first generation cpu, they are probably right now as we speak looking for ways to improve clocks and bottlenecks in the design to improve ipc, if i would guess one of the things they might do is make infinity fabric speed separate from dram frequency, this time around they optimized for low power at the 3-3.6 ghz range as they wanted to be able to have very efficient server processors

The clock speeds are set more by the Wafer Process. I'm sure they'd love to run Ryzen at 5 ghz if they could.

 

Infinity Fabric is going to be interesting to watch. I imagine it's currently tied to the DRAM to save issues but it's definitely something they'll be working on.  Before Jim Keller left, he mentioned they knew where there were some rather easy improvements to make.  It'll also be interesting to see where bandwidth starts to be an issue with the IF.  Though I imagine they can probably get it to run at 2x DRAM frequency, which would probably solve most of the issues with it.

 

Zen 2, probably 2019, looks to be a massive die-shrink.  It'll be interesting to see how they approach that with the Zen architecture.

[Tomsen]

39 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

at some point 32-bit will be dropped completely and AMD would no longer need a x86 license correct? or is x86 license required for AMD64 to work?

32-bit will probably at some point be dropped completely. It is a misunderstanding that AMD-Intel cross-license agreement is only about 32bit and 64bit. There is a lot more IP been shared required to run a fully compatible with todays 32/64-bit processor.

 

32bit x86 is a semi-open standard, due to it been on the market for more than 20 years. You can legally make 32bit x86 processors, but they are not going to be compatible with todays intel or AMD processors due to other IP.

 

33 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

32bit will probably never be dropped completely. There are tasks that don't require 64bit processing. It's the same case as with 8 and 16bit, our processors still execute with those, because there are tasks that just don't benefit from having 32bit.

These tasks don't have to be user programs either, they can be OS services.

Do note that all 8-bit and 16-bit is done by 32/64-bit hardware. They just have prefix determining their size.

 

28 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

It wasn't a failure due to anything other than legacy x86 compatibility. 

Also you can't just make a native 64bit processor when AMD64 is an extension of x86. The extension is heavily reliant on x86 and you could not just rip them apart and call it good. Companies would be more likely to turn back to IBM architechures as they a good portion use them already.

 

I know this as I from experience dealing with x86 in an almost intimate manner. 

Then you don't know your history. Itanium failed nearly in every category, everything from performance, efficiency, software-models. It is considered nearly impossible to do a make a proper compiler for, since itanium relied heavily on the compiler for most of the optimization. It was wish-full thinking from day one.

 

Just like you can't make a native 64bit ARM processor?

 

 

[MadyTehWolfie]

AMD needs to stop with this multi core CPU nonsense and just make a good 4core with 4 threads for gaming and a few multi core for productivity work.

[FakeNSA]

3 hours ago, silentprototipe said:

That moment that a CPU has as many cores and double the threads as your Computer, Laptop and Phone 

That moment when a cpu has 4x as many cores as your desktop, 8x threads, and you don't have a phone or laptop...

[Jito463]

6 minutes ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

AMD needs to stop with this multi core CPU nonsense and just make a good 4core with 4 threads for gaming and a few multi core for productivity work.

Please tell me that was meant to be sarcastic.

[Dylanc1500]

17 minutes ago, Tomsen said:

Then you don't know your history. Itanium failed nearly in every category, everything from performance, efficiency, software-models. It is considered nearly impossible to do a make a proper compiler for, since itanium relied heavily on the compiler for most of the optimization. It was wish-full thinking from day one.

 

Just like you can't make a native 64bit ARM processor?

 

 

The issues were with the first (Merced) but the issues with the wide instructions and large cache caused by the memory subsystem. Most of the issues were relieved with (McKinley). I do understand.

itanium didn't get a large following because in 03 AMD came out with the 64bit x86 extension which was  an easier upgrade due to native legacy compatibility.

[Doobeedoo]

Heh yeah fitting name. AM4 offering 8c16t processor and this new HEDT platform will be great fit between it and server ones with more memory and lanes. Cores definitely.

[MadyTehWolfie]

23 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Please tell me that was meant to be sarcastic.

Nope their 4 cores with 4 threads fall short compared to Intel's top i7 right now. I want them to beat Intel for gaming which they haven't done yet as the top i7 is still better then AMD cpus right now

[DocSwag]

6 minutes ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

Nope their 4 cores with 4 threads fall short compared to Intel's top i7 right now. I want them to beat Intel for gaming which they haven't done yet as the top i7 is still better then AMD cpus right now

That doesn't mean more cores is bad...

[MadyTehWolfie]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

That doesn't mean more cores is bad...

Never said it was but the fact remains games devs rarely code for more than 4 cores 4 threads. I want the to focus on making better cores instead of more cores, and maybe they'll be able to compete with the i7 range CPUs for gaming. Otherwise myself and others will just pass over ryzen for a I7. If their CPUs can't beat the top Intel 4 core I have no use for more cores. For gaming I can't recommend ryzen over the top of the line i7 right now.

[Drak3]

14 minutes ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

Nope their 4 cores with 4 threads fall short compared to Intel's top i7 right now. I want them to beat Intel for gaming which they haven't done yet as the top i7 is still better then AMD cpus right now

A) AMD hasn't released Ryzen 3 yet, and that's the only lineup bringing 4c/4t.

B) Of course a 4c/4t is going to lose against a 4c/8t.

C) Intel's 7700K pushes numbers that aren't actually noticeable in a double blind test. The 1700 is just as good for real world gaming as the 7700K is. The 7700K's lead exists on paper, nothing more.

1 hour ago, Tomsen said:

Do note that all 8-bit and 16-bit is done by 32/64-bit hardware. They just have prefix determining their size

Note that even though the hardware might not be native 8/16bit, it is still part of modern day computing. For it to dissapear completely for modern day computing, it has to be totally abandoned. Same with 32bit, even if we move to hardware that is only 64bit, it'll still be compatible with 32bit, or it will fail.

[MadyTehWolfie]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

A) AMD hasn't released Ryzen 3 yet, and that's the only lineup bringing 4c/4t.

B) Of course a 4c/4t is going to lose against a 4c/8t.

C) Intel's 7700K pushes numbers that aren't actually noticeable in a double blind test. The 1700 is just as good for real world gaming as the 7700K is. The 7700K's lead exists on paper, nothing more.

Note that even though the hardware might not be native 8/16bit, it is still part of modern day computing. For it to dissapear completely for modern day computing, it has to be totally abandoned. Same with 32bit, even if we move to hardware that is only 64bit, it'll still be compatible with 32bit, or it will fail.

I'll stick with Intel as a lot of games still aren't even optimized for more then 4 cores with hyperthreading. Aside from that the increase in performance is marginal in game and Linus tested it against a 7700k and it lost by a few fps sometimes a little more and matched it in a few titles.

[cj09beira]

2 minutes ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

I'll stick with Intel as a lot of games still aren't even optimized for more then 4 cores with hyperthreading. Aside from that the increase in performance is marginal in game and Linus tested it against a 7700k and it lost by a few fps sometimes a little more and matched it in a few titles.

my next cpu is going to be a ryzen as i multitask a lot, and doing more than only game at the same time creates problems 

[MadyTehWolfie]

1 minute ago, cj09beira said:

my next cpu is going to be a ryzen as i multitask a lot, and doing more than only game at the same time creates problems 

Yeah I'm talking about for people like me that only game/schoolwork who don't need those extra cores and just want fewer but more powerful cores. 

[The Benjamins]

Just now, MadyTehWolfie said:

Yeah I'm talking about for people like me that only game/schoolwork who don't need those extra cores and just want fewer but more powerful cores. 

well the designed it to scale to multiple markets, that's why it is not the top dog in game/single threaded tasks. but now they can gain market share and work on improving clocks and IPC. it might not of been the best move to make the best gaming CPU but it was the best move to build the company back up.