AMD Bristol Ridge Thread and some news

[deasd]

http://dresdenboy.blogspot.de/2016/01/amd-a10-9600p-bristol-ridge-laptop-left.html Just find some news from internet, I used to believe BR is for desktop but now it seem not, this A10-9600P is very likely for laptop. Now I consider to revaluate what BR is, I initially tend to regard it as 'Excavator 2.0'.

 

[monstercameron]

http://dresdenboy.blogspot.de/2016/01/amd-a10-9600p-bristol-ridge-laptop-left.html Just find some news from internet, I used to believe BR is for desktop but now it seem not, this A10-9600P is very likely for laptop. Now I consider to revaluate what BR is, I initially tend to regard it as 'Excavator 2.0'.

Meh...
I'll buy it just for ddr4 though.

 

[cbn]

I used to believe BR is for desktop but now it seem not, this A10-9600P is very likely for laptop. Now I consider to revaluate what BR is, I initially tend to regard it as 'Excavator 2.0'.

Yes, Bristol Ridge is definitely on mobile in the form of BGA socket FP4.

As far as we know it is the Carrizo die with the DDR4 controller enabled as one of the additional features.

And since laptop OEMs never ship with DDR3 over a speed of 1600 (for whatever reason), having the DDR4 enabled means we should see a minimum speed of 2133 on the laptops. (2133 speed RAM makes one of these processors with a TDP of 35 work much better due to the removal of the memory bandwidth bottleneck for the iGPU)

 

[VirtualLarry]

Any other new features, beyond just "enabled DDR4 memory controller"? Or are these really essentially just a re-spin of the existing Carizzo die?

 

[cbn]

Regarding Bristol Ridge on desktop (specifically AM4), I do have strong reservations based on the info I posted here, here and here.

Ideally, I think AMD would use all the best Bristol Ridge dies (eg, 4C + 512sp and 4C + 384sp) for 35W FP4. This augmented with Stoney Ridge (2C, 192sp, single channel DDR4) at 35W. Then use Carrizo (with its slower DDR3 1600 RAM) and Carrizo-L for 15W mobile.

The remaining harvested Bristol Ridge dies could be used in the following manner for AM4:

1.) dual core Bristol Ridge with 384sp (CPU and iGPU both pushed to max clocks or near max clocks with unlocked multiplier)
2.) quad core Bristol Ridge without iGPU

P.S. The beefed up dual core with 384sp (or maybe even 512sp) would be nice for entry level gamers. More serious desktop gamers could either choose the quad core Bristol Ridge and pair with dGPU or one of the Zen CPUs (that will come later on AM4) + dGPU.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Stoney Ridge is replacing Carrizo-L. FP4 Bristol Ridge is replacing Carrizo.

To the best of my knowledge, Bristol Ridge = Carrizo + process improvements. Nothing more. The AM4 Bristol Ridge products may have different power management parameters (or UEFI options to disable some/all of the power management).

 

[cbn]

Stoney Ridge is replacing Carrizo-L.

Stoney Ridge and Carrizo-L should have roughly the same die size.

But @ 15W, Shouldn't Carrizo-L have better performance per watt? quad cat cores vs. two Excavator cores.

So for practical usage I do think OEMs would continue to use Carrizo-L for 15W, but Stoney Ridge would make a better 35W chip.

 

[AtenRa]

Stoney Ridge and Carrizo should have roughly the same die size.

Im betting they are different dies. From my understanding AMD saved resources by not creating a new cat core so they could use the same IP as Carrizo but create a smaller die with Half the CPU cores, Half the memory Channel and almost half the iGPU (front-end would be the same).

 

[cbn]

Im betting they are different dies. From my understanding AMD saved resources by not creating a new cat core so they could use the same IP as Carrizo but create a smaller die with Half the CPU cores, Half the memory Channel and almost half the iGPU (front-end would be the same).

I agree they are different dies.

But I have been thinking die size will be very similar since they both have single channel controller and similar size (128sp on Carrizo-L vs. 192sp on Stoney Ridge) iGPUs, but four cat cores would be larger than one Excavator module.

Four cat cores vs. one Steam roller module:

Steam roller module vs. Excavator module:

So Carrizo-L's bigger CPU area with slightly smaller iGPU vs Stoney Ridge's smaller CPU, but slightly larger iGPU area.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Any other new features, beyond just "enabled DDR4 memory controller"? Or are these really essentially just a re-spin of the existing Carizzo die?

Its Carrizo yes.

 

[dark zero]

Regarding Bristol Ridge on desktop (specifically AM4), I do have strong reservations based on the info I posted here, here and here.

Ideally, I think AMD would use all the best Bristol Ridge dies (eg, 4C + 512sp and 4C + 384sp) for 35W FP4. This augmented with Stoney Ridge (2C, 192sp, single channel DDR4) at 35W. Then use Carrizo (with its slower DDR3 1600 RAM) and Carrizo-L for 15W mobile.

The remaining harvested Bristol Ridge dies could be used in the following manner for AM4:

1.) dual core Bristol Ridge with 384sp (CPU and iGPU both pushed to max clocks or near max clocks with unlocked multiplier)
2.) quad core Bristol Ridge without iGPU

P.S. The beefed up dual core with 384sp (or maybe even 512sp) would be nice for entry level gamers. More serious desktop gamers could either choose the quad core Bristol Ridge and pair with dGPU or one of the Zen CPUs (that will come later on AM4) + dGPU.

I feel that Single Channel BR or SR would be targeted on AM1 goodbye platform (is still not on EOL). Only to focus on AM4 once at all.

 

[The Stilt]

Bristol Ridge is essentially a Carrizo refresh. Stoney Ridge is a new, much smaller die.

 

[AtenRa]

I agree they are different dies.

But I have been thinking die size will be very similar since they both have single channel controller and similar size (128sp on Carrizo-L vs. 192sp on Stoney Ridge) iGPUs, but four cat cores would be larger than one Excavator module.

Four cat cores vs. one Steam roller module:

Steam roller module vs. Excavator module:

So Carrizo-L's bigger CPU area with slightly smaller iGPU vs Stoney Ridge's smaller CPU, but slightly larger iGPU area.

Ehm you wrote Carrizo, not Carrizo-L.

Yes Stoney Ridge could be close to 100-120mm2 and very close to Cat core SoC die sizes.

 

[MrTeal]

I agree they are different dies.

But I have been thinking die size will be very similar since they both have single channel controller and similar size (128sp on Carrizo-L vs. 192sp on Stoney Ridge) iGPUs, but four cat cores would be larger than one Excavator module.

Four cat cores vs. one Steam roller module:

Steam roller module vs. Excavator module:

So Carrizo-L's bigger CPU area with slightly smaller iGPU vs Stoney Ridge's smaller CPU, but slightly larger iGPU area.

Not that it can't, but we don't know with certainty that XV would be smaller than four cat cores. We know XV is 25% smaller than SR, and 4 cat cores are smaller than SR, but without knowing how much we can't infer a size ratio between XV and Cat. Either way though, given the size of a module vs the total die size, even 10% one way or another isn't likely to make a big impact on the total die size.

 

[cbn]

Ehm you wrote Carrizo, not Carrizo-L.

Thanks. Error fixed.

 

[cbn]

Not that it can't, but we don't know with certainty that XV would be smaller than four cat cores. We know XV is 25% smaller than SR, and 4 cat cores are smaller than SR, but without knowing how much we can't infer a size ratio between XV and Cat. Either way though, given the size of a module vs the total die size, even 10% one way or another isn't likely to make a big impact on the total die size.

Good point.

 

[Dresdenboy]

From another thread:

Given XV's size reduction (and L2) it should be smaller than this Jaguar based CU.

 

[AtenRa]

Not that it can't, but we don't know with certainty that XV would be smaller than four cat cores. We know XV is 25% smaller than SR, and 4 cat cores are smaller than SR, but without knowing how much we can't infer a size ratio between XV and Cat. Either way though, given the size of a module vs the total die size, even 10% one way or another isn't likely to make a big impact on the total die size.

Yea even with 28nm HDL one module will be bigger than 4x Cat cores at 28nm. But as you said that will only make the die close to 10nm bigger the most.

 

[AtenRa]

From another thread:

Given XV's size reduction (and L2) it should be smaller than this Jaguar based CU.

Hmm, SR Module + L2 at 28nm should be close to 5-10% smaller than 32nm SOI Bulldozer Module.

Is Bristol Ridge manufactured with HDL or not ??

 

[VirtualLarry]

I feel that Single Channel BR or SR would be targeted on AM1 goodbye platform (is still not on EOL). Only to focus on AM4 once at all.

But AM1 is a SoC platform; the SATA ports come off of the APU. Unless BR and SR are also SoCs with SATA ports, I don't think that's going to work.

To say nothing of differences between the power delivery and voltage plane differences between the "big cores" and the "cat cores".

But if it's technically possible, sure, I'd love to see it. If I could drop a 3Ghz SR APU into my AM1 boards, I would, for $60-70 or so. The HEVC decode support alone would be worth it for HTPC applications.

 

[The Stilt]

Given XV's size reduction (and L2) it should be smaller than this Jaguar based CU.

Jaguar / Puma core block is exactly 26mm² in size. Excavator CU is 2.91mm² smaller than that.

 

[LTC8K6]

Meh...
I'll buy it just for ddr4 though.

Is this the one limited to DDR4-2400? If so, it wouldn't be very fast ram?

 

[monstercameron]

Is this the one limited to DDR4-2400? If so, it wouldn't be very fast ram?

I've seen 2500mhz ddr3 on kaveri so I'm expecting maybe ddr4 2600 as a possibility...

 

[The Stilt]

In theory you can reach higher than DDR-2400 by increasing the BCLK. The theory part being, if the memory controller can do that. Unless it has been completely overhauled since Trinity / Richland / Kaveri / Godavari, then it can´t.

Besides, increasing the BCLK on any of the current APUs is a extremely bad idea. You´ll corrupt everything pretty quickly: PCI-E, SATA, DP, etc. In Carrizo the SATA interface was completely lost at 106.5MHz BCLK.

 

[dark zero]

Stoney Ridge is replacing Carrizo-L. FP4 Bristol Ridge is replacing Carrizo.

To the best of my knowledge, Bristol Ridge = Carrizo + process improvements. Nothing more. The AM4 Bristol Ridge products may have different power management parameters (or UEFI options to disable some/all of the power management).

Actually Bristol Ridge is supposed to be:
- Carrizo + DDR4 controller
- Next gen iGPU (nerfed Fiji)
- 10% more IPC

And Stoney Ridge is supposed to be nerfed BR with 2 working cores (1 TRUE Core) and Single Channel.
Maybe it is aimed to AM1 board since is not on EOL. Maybe SR is aimed to curbstomb the failure of Cherry Trail and maybe to stand for a while Apollo Lake (who will be a MASSIVE revamp on Atom from Intel side bringing finally to Core 2 Duo E 6750 levels)