Nah it's was finished. Drivers could have been better and they still had higher clock speed goals. But it is a finished product. But the point being that Vega requires a lot of power at its clock speed, it's generally due to trying to create a really efficient design. If you try to push it out of it's comfort zone for that efficiency power usage sky rockets. Hell you could have 4 of these CPU's in the amount of power that Vega64 leaks at stock. 2-3GHz is the strong point for Zen and it's obvious that at 2.0GHz+ that even with some iGPU load Zen is insanely efficient if it can pull off 15w with a 4c part.
-
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.
AMD Raven Ridge 'Zen APU' Thread
Page 64 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Yotsugi
Golden Member
WHILE MISSING AT LEAST TWO CRUCIAL UARCH FEATURES?
ARE YOU SHITTING ME PAL?
SOMEONE GOTTA BOMB FORMER ATi CAMPUS FOR THAT.
PhonakV30
Senior member
Full Slide can be found on this :
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1196...-vega-and-updated-zen?utm_source=notification
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1196...-vega-and-updated-zen?utm_source=notification
It's about packaging not about being cheap. Sometimes being cheap also applies. But realistically adding slots adds several mm to the design.
Yes and as nobody changes ram besides 0.1% better looks win.
Exactly, Heck even as an enthusiast my dream is to get this into a Surface like Tablet to replace my SP3. Hoping by the beginning of the year next year I will see one, or I might get the ROG 8c laptop as a semi portable workstation. But really I am hoping for a true Tablet option a 4c replacement for my Surface is more important than the half dozen of times I would want the 8c on the laptop next year.
The Stilt
Golden Member
I'd love to know how long the Raven mobile SKUs are allowed to / can maintain the 25W boost, until they (gracefully) taper down to 15W.
At those power limits even the lower-end systems shouldn't be too badly thermally limited.
Jan Olšan
Senior member
Dunno about you but IMHO it was clear the 2500U and 2700U were going to be 15W.
The U-suffix was clearly chosen to match Intel and they have different letters for 35-45W chips. And we know there are ES chips with higher base clock in FP5 package which will fit that TDP likely.
The U-suffix was clearly chosen to match Intel and they have different letters for 35-45W chips. And we know there are ES chips with higher base clock in FP5 package which will fit that TDP likely.
I get what you are saying and 15w is probably something people could have inferred from the U name (though it could have been a designator for Mobile Ryzen and now a TDP rating). But with this you are seeing Clock speeds competitive (through lower) on a 4 core CPU with a fairly large iGPU using as much power as a space typically reserved for 2 core CPU's. That is the revelation. "Knowing" that it was 15w is only half the battle.
DrMrLordX
Lifer
Only a tiny percentage (read: a few "enthusiasts") actually upgrades a laptop. Most buyers will never pop it open, much less think about the DIMM configuration.
Odd that they don't have a 16GB option, but it's good that they went dual-channel. Someone got the memo.
I agree. Like TheStilt, I find myself wondering how long these chips are allowed to operate outside of their TDP range before throttling back. Should be interesting to see battery life tests on these.
It's those DLDOs at work.
See above, and thank you for confirming what I've been saying for awhile. Soldered SODIMMs are practical for the majority of buyers. I'm not 100% sure I like the obvious RAM limits, but at least they're using a dual-channel config. They are probably saving some money going with a soldered solution, and the end-user doesn't have to worry about upgrading RAM to get full memory performance at the rated speed.
moinmoin
Diamond Member
I just want to bounce this idea.
At 15W, it seems to perform really well. I also assume that this chip has full x16 PCIe pins? Knowing that 2 socket EPYC is connected using PCIe pins (dual purpose IO pins), what is the chance that AMD will allow dual APU laptop?
I mean, all the components are in place now. We know that IF runs over PCIe pins. 2 socket EPYC system has proven that AMD can build system that scales well using 2 sockets connected using PCIe pins. It would add so much more performance for the engineers who crave CPU power than adding a discrete GPU in a notebook.
Basically, such setup would offer 1.5X performance of current Macbook Pro with 2.9GHz quad-core 7th-generation Intel Core i7 processor + Radeon Pro 560 while consuming less power than just one of the chips (CPU is 35W TDP right? GPU is 35W TDP https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-Pro-560-GPU-Benchmarks-and-Specs.226608.0.html) The board should not be any bigger than the current board since we are talking placing another APU in place of discrete GPU. 1.5X performance at half the power. We are talking 3X perf/watt.
All the pieces of required technology is there. Whether AMD has used the same PCIe/IF phy or not is the only question. If they did, AMD should be able to build such system with only firmware/software tweaks.
Anybody want to comment?
At 15W, it seems to perform really well. I also assume that this chip has full x16 PCIe pins? Knowing that 2 socket EPYC is connected using PCIe pins (dual purpose IO pins), what is the chance that AMD will allow dual APU laptop?
I mean, all the components are in place now. We know that IF runs over PCIe pins. 2 socket EPYC system has proven that AMD can build system that scales well using 2 sockets connected using PCIe pins. It would add so much more performance for the engineers who crave CPU power than adding a discrete GPU in a notebook.
Basically, such setup would offer 1.5X performance of current Macbook Pro with 2.9GHz quad-core 7th-generation Intel Core i7 processor + Radeon Pro 560 while consuming less power than just one of the chips (CPU is 35W TDP right? GPU is 35W TDP https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-Pro-560-GPU-Benchmarks-and-Specs.226608.0.html) The board should not be any bigger than the current board since we are talking placing another APU in place of discrete GPU. 1.5X performance at half the power. We are talking 3X perf/watt.
All the pieces of required technology is there. Whether AMD has used the same PCIe/IF phy or not is the only question. If they did, AMD should be able to build such system with only firmware/software tweaks.
Anybody want to comment?
Yotsugi
Golden Member
So Raven Ridge has per-core frequency and voltage control... if that's configurable in the BIOS then we could see per-core overclocking on future desktop chips! Wonder if anyone at AMD has thought about that?
The same reason you want MCM/chiplet design in bigger systems. More performance/watt at lower price. You are reusing the chip that you already made to build higher end systems.
Yotsugi
Golden Member
You're suggesting NUMA setup in a laptop when OEMs are too greedy for damned dual channel?
Ayy lmao.
Besides NUMA in laptop?
Don't be so silly.
The perf/watt comes from low clock speed + power management tricks.
They could easily just clock a R7 1700 at 2 ghz and do the same with pretty much any discrete GPU.
All the benefits, none of the multi-cpu/gpu headaches.
In a laptop it'll be limited by cooling anyhow, just like a 2xAPU would be.
I thought i had that opportunity on the 1700 ryzen i bought launch day. Lol
I dont know if if there is anyone on amd that havnt thought of it.
This is a cherry picked benchmark and we have to wait for some 2700U benchmarks from a neutral source based on a production notebook. Take time to think about.
https://www.computerbase.de/bildstrecke/80377/7/
In this slide Cinebench runs way slower on 2700U. AMD isn't trustable when it comes to such marketing slides.
Yotsugi
Golden Member
This is simply your usual 30s nuclear boost.
Intel does the same as long as chassis is not made of garbage.
Can you read? These are sustained results, 5minute loop of running CB15 with thermal throttling and the likes of it.
It's paints a completely different picture because i7-8550U scores 540-550 points @15W sustained in an Aspire 5:
https://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-...-i7-8550U-MX-150-Full-HD-Laptop.258204.0.html
2700U isn't any better in this cherry picked benchmark. Pretty sure KBL-R still has the upper hand quite easily when it comes to CPU performance.
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
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
