News AMD previews Ryzen 3rd generation at CES

Hitman928

Golden Member
Apr 15, 2012
1,602
61
136
#1
More info to come. . .
 

Hitman928

Golden Member
Apr 15, 2012
1,602
61
136
#2
AMD demo compared Ryzen 3rd gen to Intel 9900k on cinebench. Ryzen not at final clocks.

AMD system running at 133W vs 180W for 9900K

Ryzen at 2057 points vs 2040 points on 9900k
 

ub4ty

Senior member
Jun 21, 2017
749
307
96
#8
Would have loved to have gotten more info but knew this wouldn't be the case when it was delayed to the end of presentation. Very nice to see that they used the chiplet on Ryzen Desktop. They also demo'd it beating the 9900k in Cinebench w/ 50-60 less wattage. Given that EPYC has 64 cores and 8 compute chiplets.. that means that the 8 cores are all flat on the demo'd Ryzen 3 and have equal access to I/O through the chiplet.

As I stated in the spec thread, the 9900k is a dead processor and so is Intel until they deliver in 2020/2021. That is now confirmed. What I now await is how much I/O they've crammed into that I/O chiplet, whether or not PCIE 4.0 is supported, performance, price and clocks.
 

ub4ty

Senior member
Jun 21, 2017
749
307
96
#10
Only 8 core/16 thread shown.
The fact that its wedged so high up leads me to believe they might and can put another 8 cores on there... especially given that they have that massive I/O chip. If they went out of their way to make a custom desktop I/O chip, I am sure there will be another compute chiplet tossed on there.
 

ub4ty

Senior member
Jun 21, 2017
749
307
96
#13
Yep, just caught it.. Very nice Screen Shot 2019-01-09 at 1.35.37 PM.png

Something tells me CCIX from CPU to their 7nm GPU is lurking and undisclosed and that new GPU supports PCIE 4.0 as well... potentially
 

EXCellR8

Platinum Member
Sep 1, 2010
2,705
29
126
#14
I can totally live with a mid 2019 release... gives me a chance to stash away a bit more funds and allows my 1700 to have one last good hurrah. Seems like the PCIe 4.0 support might prompt a board upgrade though.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,293
245
126
#15
The fact that its wedged so high up leads me to believe they might and can put another 8 cores on there... especially given that they have that massive I/O chip. If they went out of their way to make a custom desktop I/O chip, I am sure there will be another compute chiplet tossed on there.
I would imagine that they'll eventually do it, but right now they can beat Intel's best with just one chiplet and at less power. I'm willing to bet that they can drive the clocks even higher and have a reasonable performance lead at similar power levels.

What do you think AMD is going to sell that for? I don't know the exact dollar amount, but I'm willing to bet it's a lot less than the $500 9900k.

They probably don't have enough chiplets to make a 16 core Ryzen right now, not when anything that's fully functional can be put in an Epyc CPU instead. But it doesn't really matter what Intel counters with since AMD will eventually be able to hammer them with a two chiplet part, even if it only offers 12 functional cores.
 
Oct 10, 1999
64,859
98
126
#16
The fact that its wedged so high up leads me to believe they might and can put another 8 cores on there... especially given that they have that massive I/O chip. If they went out of their way to make a custom desktop I/O chip, I am sure there will be another compute chiplet tossed on there.
Quite possible.
 

Saylick

Senior member
Sep 10, 2012
573
16
91
#18
The fact that its wedged so high up leads me to believe they might and can put another 8 cores on there... especially given that they have that massive I/O chip. If they went out of their way to make a custom desktop I/O chip, I am sure there will be another compute chiplet tossed on there.
So Ian calculates that the Ryzen IO die is slightly larger than a 1/4 the size of the EPYC IO die. I would not be surprised if the Ryzen IO die is different than the EPYC IO die so that it is possible to match up two Zen 2 compute dies, or a Zen 2 compute die with a Vega II compute die. The server IO die doesn't have to worry about having GPUs as part of the package while APUs will be released for Ryzen 3000.
 

mohit9206

Senior member
Jul 2, 2013
981
41
116
#19
I can totally live with a mid 2019 release... gives me a chance to stash away a bit more funds and allows my 1700 to have one last good hurrah. Seems like the PCIe 4.0 support might prompt a board upgrade though.
Why not keep your 1700 till Zen 3 atleast?
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,293
245
126
#20
View attachment 2307
Look closely below the top die, what do you see when its titled at this angle?
:cool:
It's a really savage reveal if you think about it.

This is AMD showing that they can beat Intel with one hand behind their back.

It basically confirms that they've hit IPC and clock parity, or that they've surpassed Intel in at least one of those dimensions.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,293
245
126
#21
So Ian calculates that the Ryzen IO die is slightly larger than a 1/4 the size of the EPYC IO die. I would not be surprised if the Ryzen IO die is different than the EPYC IO die so that it is possible to match up two Zen 2 compute dies, or a Zen 2 compute die with a Vega II compute die. The server IO die doesn't have to worry about having GPUs as part of the package while APUs will be released for Ryzen 3000.
I'd imagine that it's just for 2x Zen 2 chiplets, but the possibility of being able to integrate with a Radeon chiplet is certainly fascinating. However, that might not be something we see until the 4000 series as it would require a major shift in the way AMD designs their GPUs.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,293
245
126
#22
Why not keep your 1700 till Zen 3 atleast?
The results they demonstrated indicated that an 8-core Zen 2 can beat a 9900k. That means the clock speeds and the IPC have to be similar to what a 9900k has, or that if the clock speeds aren't quite as high, the IPC is much better.

If you look at benchmarks between the 1700 and 9900k, the latter is about 44% better on average. AMD said the clocks weren't final either, so it could well end up that you can get a 50% bump over a 1700. I think that's certainly worth considering. The additional gains with Zen 3 probably won't see a similarly substantial jump.

Unless AMD starts charging Intel level prices or Intel comes out with a much better deal, I'm pretty much sold on Zen 2 when it launches.
 

Elfear

Diamond Member
May 30, 2004
6,789
17
106
#24
Why not keep your 1700 till Zen 3 atleast?
From a 1700 to Matisse wille be a significant up tick in performance. If we go by Cinebench 15 scores:

1700 = ~1415
2700X = ~1754
Matisse = ~2023

That's a 43% performance increase. Not too bad for a CPU upgrade these days.
 

coercitiv

Platinum Member
Jan 24, 2014
2,962
254
136
#25
BTW the 9900K in the CB15 test was running at 4.7Ghz, since running within 95W TDP would only yield a CB15 score of around 1760.
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY