What happened to Triple-Core CPUs?

[CapitalistVN]

Why don't CPUs manufacturers produce Triple-core designs? (AMD anyone?) I don't see any disadvantages with them, and if there are, can you guys suggest some? Just for knowledge and curiosity purposes.

[Sousuke]

It's mainly due to the 3 core AMD Designs being 4 Cores with a faulty core which was disabled.

 

It was just a way of them selling faulty inventory as good.

[TheRandomness]

Because the price difference between a triple core and a quad core would not be massive at all, and the manufacturing process has improved over the years, meaning less faulty dies. Therefore, there’s simply just no need for a triple core to exist. 

[CapitalistVN]

Just now, TheRandomness said:

Because the price difference between a triple core and a quad core would not be massive at all, and the manufacturing process has improved over the years, meaning less faulty dies. Therefore, there’s simply just no need for a triple core to exist. 

Then why don't we just get rid of dual-cores?

[Apepa]

2 minutes ago, Sousuke said:

It's mainly due to the 3 core AMD Designs being 4 Cores with a faulty core which was disabled.

 

It was just a way of them selling faulty inventory as good.

It wasn't always a faulty core...

 

...But that's a story for another time.

[TheRandomness]

2 minutes ago, CapitalistVN said:

Then why don't we just get rid of dual-cores?

Because there’s a market for them. 

[Jurrunio]

2 minutes ago, CapitalistVN said:

Then why don't we just get rid of dual-cores?

Basic office systems will do with dual core CPUs. They make up a very large market still.

[CapitalistVN]

1 minute ago, TheRandomness said:

Because there’s a market for them. 

But wouldn't the market also benefit from Triple-core? The performance between dual cores and triple cores is also not great?

[Apepa]

2 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Because the price difference between a triple core and a quad core would not be massive at all, and the manufacturing process has improved over the years, meaning less faulty dies. Therefore, there’s simply just no need for a triple core to exist. 

I was under the impression that's still how Intel and AMD produce different CPUs?

[TheRandomness]

Just now, Apepa said:I was under the impression that's still how Intel and AMD produce different CPUs?

AMD just doesn’t bother with dual cores. But yes, that’s how they’re made still. AMD bins their Zeppelin dies all the way from the full 8 cores enabled, down to the 4 cores of the R3 lineup. Intel does sort of the same, with Pentium Gold and i3s coming from one bin, and i5s and i7s coming from another, and i9s and the server CPUs from another. 

Just now, CapitalistVN said:

But wouldn't the market also benefit from Triple-core? The performance between dual cores and triple cores is also not great?

Triple core CPUs consumer more power and produce more heat. In the embedded or small form factor market, those aren’t good things. 

[CapitalistVN]

1 minute ago, TheRandomness said:

Triple core CPUs consumer more power and produce more heat. In the embedded or small form factor market, those aren’t good things. 

 

But one more core won't make that much of a difference I think. Also there are a lot of supreme SFF coolers now, the heat dissipation shouldn't be a concern.

P/S sorry if I bother you so much. It's just that I have been questioning this for a long time

[Daniel Z.]

11 minutes ago, Sousuke said:

It's mainly due to the 3 core AMD Designs being 4 Cores with a faulty core which was disabled.

 

It was just a way of them selling faulty inventory as good.

Still happens on Ryzen lol. Also 970 and 1070 and a bunch more gpus

[CapitalistVN]

Just now, Daniel Z. said:

Still happens on Ryzen lol. Also 970 and 1070 and a bunch more gpus

Yeah people are telling the 1070Ti is a binned 1080.

[Apepa]

11 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Intel does sort of the same, with Pentium Gold and i3s coming from one bin, and i5s and i7s coming from another, and i9s and the server CPUs from another.

I would have thought the binning was more complex than that. For example, binning the slower running 6-cores as i5 8400s, and the faster ones as i7s. Or if you have a 6-core die with 1 or 2 bad or very slow cores, it becomes an i3.

[komar]

I would suggest its due to the fact that most operations are utilized for dual or quad and above core CPUs. So say You want a office/home machine that is cheap and still plays movies and runs Word and Excel - you go and buy a dual core. Now we all know most modern games don't even start on dual cores so if you want to play games you need quad or more.

Where does the 3 core chip fit in?

It will cost more than the dual core and produce more heat  and I doubt it will run games/programs  that require minimum 4.

You can't advertise it really. I bet that's the reason it died off - from business point of view not easy salable...

[TheRandomness]

48 minutes ago, Apepa said:

I would have thought the binning was more complex than that. For example, binning the slower running 6-cores as i5 8400s, and the faster ones as i7s. Or if you have a 6-core die with 1 or 2 bad or very slow cores, it becomes an i3.

I say binning in terms of overall grouping. Of course, the bin for the i5s and i7s will be divided into the ones that overclock higher, perform better...etc and the ones that are kinda mediocre. The former becomes i7s with hyperthreading enabled, the latter becoming i5s with it disabled.

[Apepa]

3 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

I say binning in terms of overall grouping. Of course, the bin for the i5s and i7s will be divided into the ones that overclock higher, perform better...etc and the ones that are kinda mediocre. The former becomes i7s with hyperthreading enabled, the latter becoming i5s with it disabled.

It's fairly opaque subject that I'm very curious about, especially since we know AMD used to ship chips with perfectly good cores disabled so that they could satisfy demand for lower-end products.

[TheRandomness]

2 hours ago, Apepa said:

It's fairly opaque subject that I'm very curious about, especially since we know AMD used to ship chips with perfectly good cores disabled so that they could satisfy demand for lower-end products.

Previously, they did that, yes. But now, all Ryzen, Threadripper and EPYC CPUs use the same die, with the exception of the APUs.

[KarathKasun]

5 hours ago, CapitalistVN said:

Yeah people are telling the 1070Ti is a binned 1080.

GTX 1070/1070 Ti/1080/1070M/1080M are all bins of the same chip.

Intel dual cores are a different chip altogether from the quads.  Since SB there have always been two chip designs for mainstream, a 2c (Pentium, i3) and a 4c (i5, i7).  The 2c chips may be going away as they are replaced with quad core chips and the quads are being replaced with hex cores. 

 

Ryzen quads being cut down eight core dies is at an end.  All of the quads going forward are going to be APUs, which are a native quad core chip.  The only reason AMD was selling 50% disabled chips was because the native quad core wasnt ready at launch.