-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Question AMD Phoenix/Zen 4 APU Speculation and Discussion
Page 69 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
GodisanAtheist
Diamond Member
APUs have always been frustrating with the CPU/GPU mix.
A nice 4/8 or 6/12 CPU with the biggest available GPU offering would be a sweet spot product that would sell like hot cakes but AMD chose to scale the GPU and CPU alongside each other so you often end up with too much CPU for the GPU power on tap.
Give us a 7345 XTX and a 7545 XTX that give us a full fat 12CU GPU at the $100 and $150 price points
A nice 4/8 or 6/12 CPU with the biggest available GPU offering would be a sweet spot product that would sell like hot cakes but AMD chose to scale the GPU and CPU alongside each other so you often end up with too much CPU for the GPU power on tap.
Give us a 7345 XTX and a 7545 XTX that give us a full fat 12CU GPU at the $100 and $150 price points
Thunder 57
Diamond Member
Why would they make a 6/12 + 12CU part for $80 less than a vanillia 7600 currently sells for?
The market has no option but to accept whatever AMD does because there is no competition on APUs.
Thunder 57
Diamond Member
There's always the option to not buy it. I doubt many do anyway or these parts would be much higher priority.
GodisanAtheist
Diamond Member
- OK, then make it $120 less 😛
I admit I'm not 100% dialed in on the new prices right now, but the fact that you're getting a decent gaming CPU (with some compromises like fewer PCI-e Lanes) along with an entry level gaming GPU ($75 for the CPU and $75 for the 7300 level graphics) seems like a reasonably fair asking price on both fronts IMO.
TESKATLIPOKA
Platinum Member
You don't need 6CU RDNA3 to match Vega 8 at 2GHz.
3GHz clock would put It at 3/4 of Vega 8.
I am using 3GHz, because mobile R5 7545U has 2.8GHz IGP, so extra 200MHz should be doable.
And the rest of the performance would come from better IPC.
ComputerBase measured 28% between Vega vs RDNA1.
RDNA3 is a bit faster than RDNA1, so I think It would perform comparably to 5700G.
The problem is that the performance stagnated in such a way in the last few years that 3/4 of a 5700G 2Ghz Vega 8 we are talking about 2018 2400G performance here, or even lower. They cant really launch a 2400G-3200G level IGP in a SKU called "7500G" 2024. Well see what happens.
But it doesn't make sense to sell a more expensive to make chip for less. Especially when Raphael is better.
moinmoin
Diamond Member
It's the same old story: The problem with APUs is that currently they sell for a comparable prices as CPUs while manufacturing costs are significantly higher. The only way you get better (as in bigger) iGPUs is by paying more for it on top of comparable CPU prices. AMD so far doesn't deem it realistic that the audience willing to do that exists in a sizeable enough amount.
Is there a single 13-14” Phoenix laptop in the USA with
A 2.5-2.8K *non-OLED* (so LCD) display
16-32GB LPDDR5 (not DDR like the Pav Plus)
No dGPU
And at least a 60whr battery?
How hard is this AMD? Everything is either a bloated gaming laptop or makes an insane compromise between an FHD display and an OLED 2.8K display (like with the Z3), or is just some mixed monstrosity like the Acer 16” laptop with OLED etc.
The Lenovo Slim Pro 7 gets close and blows it with a 3050 & notable fan + idle issues.
Lenovo Z3 only has an FHD and 2.8K OLED option, has insane pricing too.
HP Elitebook or Framework laptop are DDR.
Asus is always a mess on availability in the US and doesn’t seem like they have a 7840 laptop coming soon to the US within the target market — although they updated a page last I checked for the S 13 but no more at all.
This probably comes down partially to Intel’s engineering resources with partners but from my POV the AMD *ultraportable* situation is still a cluster especially in the US. But I don’t care why, just the outcome.
Honestly even MTL with apparent meme volumes might have more availability than this for the segment in question and in the US.
A 2.5-2.8K *non-OLED* (so LCD) display
16-32GB LPDDR5 (not DDR like the Pav Plus)
No dGPU
And at least a 60whr battery?
How hard is this AMD? Everything is either a bloated gaming laptop or makes an insane compromise between an FHD display and an OLED 2.8K display (like with the Z3), or is just some mixed monstrosity like the Acer 16” laptop with OLED etc.
The Lenovo Slim Pro 7 gets close and blows it with a 3050 & notable fan + idle issues.
Lenovo Z3 only has an FHD and 2.8K OLED option, has insane pricing too.
HP Elitebook or Framework laptop are DDR.
Asus is always a mess on availability in the US and doesn’t seem like they have a 7840 laptop coming soon to the US within the target market — although they updated a page last I checked for the S 13 but no more at all.
This probably comes down partially to Intel’s engineering resources with partners but from my POV the AMD *ultraportable* situation is still a cluster especially in the US. But I don’t care why, just the outcome.
Honestly even MTL with apparent meme volumes might have more availability than this for the segment in question and in the US.
The balance used to be that you get less CPU and in exchange, more GPU. This was true on Picasso, they made it more "equal" on Renoir, by giving more cpu and reducing the gpu and now they are prioritizing cpu over gpu, in a APU.
If you try to put a HUGE igp along with a HUGE cpu its no wonder it will be expensive. With that in mind i think it was a mistake to move to 8c/16t APU, if you need that much cpu you probably want a dgpu.
Maybe it made sense on AM4 because Intel sold a lot of i5, i7 and i9 with igps, that probably will never get a dgpu (this is far more common that some people realise), but in AM5 when all CPU have a igp the priority should be GPU first in APUs.
All that said, i dont belive the problem is cost, the problem is that we have zero competition, AMD is sitting on the same position as Intel on the 6th gen right now, at least in APUs. When they need it, they came out with Picasso in 2018, giving a huge APU (for that time) at a very competitive price, hell they even used the same die for $50 Athlons 200GE.
Now in 2024 they are going to try to sell what in a normal situation would be the Athlon 3000G die of 2024, as a Ryzen 5 7500G ? Something is very very wrong here.
I can understand inflation and that prices cant be the same as 5 year ago, but here we are talking about selling what should be a entry level product as midrange and the IGP Phoenix 2 has is just not up to the task.
Last edited:
Old Entry Level dGPUs are the competition really.
FlameTail
Diamond Member
Exactly. The situation with AMD APU laptops is pathetic.
Which is why I am hoping Qualcomm comes along and becomes a disruptor with their Snapdragon X processors
Yep. People say it’s improved — that’s mostly only true for gaming laptops, dGPU/OLED pairs and some absurd workstation stuff.
The funny thing is since Phoenix isn’t really all that efficient when it comes to mixed/low loads, dumb stuff like these OLED displays or DDR hurts that much more.
moinmoin
Diamond Member
It's not up to AMD. And unless Qalcomm launches its own laptops it won't be up to Qualcomm either.
Well for one thing that’s wrong, this is a bidirectional influence here and AMD prioritizes gaming supply which influences product availability and timelines (if even considered). They also don’t get quite the partnerships on big designs for ultramobile where input is probably helpful like Intel do probably because they lack the same resources (though getting better).
Qualcomm has basically my sole market segment in mind to begin with. There isn’t going to be a DDR5 X Elite part, it’s a LPDDR5 part. And no one is going to build a 80-100W gaming laptop right out of the gate with an X Elite because the advantages over AMD or Intel diminish and they are functionally portable desktops (also games compat issues). It would make no sense. We won’t even see dGPU’s with it for a good while most likely, that’s a hypothetical at this stage.
So I can write those big ticket cancers off!
What Qualcomm’s market will look like is obviously much more like Intel’s ultrabooks with Lenovo/Dell/HP etc. And I only need maybe one or two laptops within that segment from an one or two OEMs out of the gate in 2024 for a reasonable draw given constraints above. I’m pretty sure one will be suitable tbh.
Last edited:
I'm curious, why do you dislike OLED?
As for the reasons why there's a dearth of Ultrabook-ish Phoenix laptops, it certainly isn't engineering since Lenovo (for example) have them available in other markets, just not North America.
If you're willing to accept a slightly more squarish look and 1.3mm more in thickness than the Pro 7 (but half a pound lighter), Lenovo have 40% off on the T14s. $1300 for a 7840U with 32GB RAM (LPDDR5X), 1TB SSD, and a 2.2K IPS.
In other regions, like the EU, Lenovo has the IdeaPad Pro 5, the Yoga Slim 6, the newly released Yoga Slim 7 (which was confused with the Slim 6 by initial Slim 6 reviewers), and the Yoga Pro 7. All those are available with 14-14.5" 2.5K+ IPS displays, 70+ Wh batteries, and 16-32GB 6400-LPDDR(X) memory. Without a dGPU.
RE: OLED: Power and longevity. It eats more regardless but also they are not afaict using the latest emitters and display lamination technologies either so there is probably room to run, but even so, why not wait until that’s worked out.
It’s mass market from a cost/production standpoint vs years ago but not as worthwhile as like in smartphones yet. So I’ll pass.
And yeah, Europe gets better offerings from Lenovo and Asus that usually have 1, 2 or even like 3 laptops that will match what I have in mind. Here, to the extent you do see such laptop display/RAM/Build specs (and you can find them) you really only see it for Intel SKUs.
igor_kavinski
Lifer
We have a date:
videocardz.com
Gigabyte confirms the launch of AMD's next-gen desktop APU (Ryzen 8000G) series scheduled is for the end of January - VideoCardz.com
AMD Ryzen 8000G to launch end of January Gigabyte spoils AMD plans, confirms upcoming Ryzen 8000G series launch date. The open secret is now even more open. The most recent updates to AGESA for AMD 600-series motherboards are indeed meant to support next-gen AMD desktop APUs. Gigabyte has just...
videocardz.com
FlameTail
Diamond Member
Am I the only one who wishes the CPU and GPU weren't tied together in the APU segmentation?
For example:
Ryzen 7840 : 8-core CPU, 12 CU GPU
Ryzen 7640 : 6-core CPU, 6 CU GPU
Why does the CPU and GPU have to be tied together? It's been this way in previous generations too.
Why can't we have a 6-core CPU + 12 CU GPU combo?
For example:
Ryzen 7840 : 8-core CPU, 12 CU GPU
Ryzen 7640 : 6-core CPU, 6 CU GPU
Why does the CPU and GPU have to be tied together? It's been this way in previous generations too.
Why can't we have a 6-core CPU + 12 CU GPU combo?
GodisanAtheist
Diamond Member
-Yep, it'd be nice to get the full fat GPU on an entry or mid-range CPU.
As it stands the APU config typically ends up way too CPU heavy (and expensive) at the top of the stack, and way too lite on GPU power at the price points that a 12CU GPU would be most popular at.
SteinFG
Senior member
Because they want to upcharge for better features, duh. Also 7640U/HS is 8CU, not 6
coercitiv
Diamond Member
Would you be willing to pay 80%- 90% of the 7840 price for such a product?
As consumers, we are tempted to look at these SKUs and arbitrary assign different monetary values to die segments based on needs/wants. For example, if I want an 8-core with 3CU, should I expect this CPU to be equally priced or even cheaper than the 7640?
We all know the real problem is die size or better yet - overall production cost, APU manufacturer spends the money to make the full chip no matter how we'd like to cut it, and they want their healthy margins too. They put as many CPU cores and as many GPU cores in there as they attempt to cover as much of the market segment as possible. If they got so close that you're asking for 6C+12CU, then it's mission accomplished for them, because their plan is for the 8C+12CU to cover both you and the folks who think they need a few more CPU cores. The economies of scale may even enable them to offer you 2 CPU cores for "free", even if you don't see it that way. The 8C+12CU covers both 6C+12CU and 8C+6/8/10CU while making sure that laptops made with this SKU are equally enticing to more consumers. Each consumer is getting a different price for their CPU cores and GPU cores based on their perceived needs, we just don't realize this because we focus on the final package which costs the same for everyone.
I think the one important metric is how well Phoenix handles market needs for the price AMD is asking. Is the 7840 sold at a good enough price? Is the 7640 truly value oriented, compelling? If the answer is yes, then both the full die and the cut die are sized properly for the two major parts of the market they're addressing, and further intermediary cuts may not necessarily bring value to consumers (assuming the environment is already competitive). Also, some of the intermediary performance requirements are served by previous gen designs, a full 12CU 680M is still close in performance while the 7735 SKU is cheaper.
To sum things up, APUs are always about giving parts of the die at different prices to different segments of the market. If we focus solely on the piece of the steak we're getting, we might forget how the steak got to us in the first place.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
