AMD will launch AM4 platform in March 2016 says industry source

[AtenRa]

Yes, I realize Bristol Ridge is coming to desktop.

But specifically the 4C 512sp and 4C 384sp dies don't make much sense on AM4. 512sp desktop iGPU in mid to late 2016 is not relevant for gaming when today's low profile cards are already faster.

For 35W mobile though, I can see Bristol Ridge quad core with iGPU with a potential niche against either 28W Intel GT3e or 15W Intel + GM108 DDR3 (ie, GT940M). In this scenario, the investment AMD made in integration makes a lot more sense.

Yes, they havent been able to fully leverage their advantage in Mobile until now. I believe things will start to get better from now on as the consumer starting to understand the big difference between Intel iGPU and AMD iGPU. And also OEMs starting to use AMD APUs, and some of them for the first time, like DELL ??

 

[Fjodor2001]

Why would anything change that didn't change the last 10 years happen? Its a company run into the ground and is expected to perform miracles?

Because we haven't seen anything remotely close to the Zen initiative from AMD in the last 10 years? Everything has just been incremental updates except for Bulldozer. And AMD has not been on a competitive process node compared to Intel during that time either.

If anything Zen is to be compared to K8 and Bulldozer. The former was a success, the latter wasn't. Not much statistics to go by, but 50% chance of success is not bad.

 

[ShintaiDK]

K8 was only a success due to P4. It was chanceless against Pentium-M.

And AMDs R&D have never been lower, yet miracles are expected. You do know the only number you got, is based on "up to" terms?

AMD will use 14LPP and 16FF+ for GPUs. The GPU division doesn't have much faith in the praised 14LPP either it seems.

 

[Fjodor2001]

K8 was only a success due to P4.

You mean because Intel's desktop CPU performance improvements had stagnated at the time? I.e. the same as we're seeing today?

And AMDs R&D have never been lower, yet miracles are expected.

Yes, we all know you're related claims:

When you look on the R&D budget, there is no way AMD will be creating a big core

Its no secret from AMDs CEO either that they gave up on performance parts. Its the cycle for AMD to replace VIA.

It seems at 10nm that Intel may be 4-5 years ahead. Assuming that 10nm ever materialize for the foundries.

But none of that turned out to be true, did it?

AMD will use 14LPP and 16FF+ for GPUs. The GPU division doesn't have much faith in the praised 14LPP either it seems.

You could just as well say that "Since the CPU division went for 14LPP it's because they know it's better than 16FF+.". The truth is we don't know what lies behind these decisions.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I see you changed focus again. You forgot a node is not only about area, but also electrics. Hence why TSMCs 16FF+ is vastly superior to 14LPP. And why A10 will be TSMC 16FF+(FFC perhaps) only.

And I can see the Pentium-M part broke your dreams along with the "up to" moniker. So your next step was personal.

In terms of IPC, x86 stagnated with the PPro. Yet you expect miracles from a company run into the ground by incompetence.

I will be enjoying my "slow" quadcore for a long, long time

 

[mrmt]

But none of that turned out to be true, did it?
You could just as well say that "Since the CPU division went for 14LPP it's because they know it's better than 16FF+.". The truth is we don't know what lies behind these decisions.

The last official information from AMD is that they are obliged to manufacture all their MPUs with Globalfoundries. You are not shy to baseless speculation about AMD being free of the WSA, but you fight people who speculate (with more evidence than you) that the TSMC process is better than Samsung's. No wonder that even new posters are finding you terribly biased.

 

[maddie]

I see you changed focus again. You forgot a node is not only about area, but also electrics. Hence why TSMCs 16FF+ is vastly superior to 14LPP. And why A10 will be TSMC 16FF+(FFC perhaps) only.

And I can see the Pentium-M part broke your dreams along with the "up to" moniker. So your next step was personal.

In terms of IPC, x86 stagnated with the PPro. Yet you expect miracles from a company run into the ground by incompetence.

I will be enjoying my "slow" quadcore for a long, long time

The last official information from AMD is that they are obliged to manufacture all their MPUs with Globalfoundries. You are not shy to baseless speculation about AMD being free of the WSA, but you fight people who speculate (with more evidence than you) that the TSMC process is better than Samsung's. No wonder that even new posters are finding you terribly biased.

I am interested in these facts, can you post links to the info or post it here directly.

 

[Fjodor2001]

You are not shy to baseless speculation about AMD being free of the WSA,

Here we go again with more lies. I've never claimed that the WSA is not valid for AMD anymore. Where did you get that from!? All we know is that AMD will be producing Zen on both Samsung and GF 14nm process. The exact terms of the agreements are unknown. It could be that AMD will start producing at Samsung (which has the process up and running) and then move over production to GF later. But we don't know.

No wonder that even new posters are finding you terribly biased.

Lol! I'm biased because I'm questioning ShintaiDK's relentless AMD bashing and baseless speculation? If you're looking for bias, you should look in the mirror. Make sure to stand next to ShintaiDK and the rest of the IST members.

 

[Fjodor2001]

I see you changed focus again.

Nope, I just questioned your claims. And as usual you shy away from the subject once your "facts" were exposed as incorrect.

 

[mrmt]

Here we go again with more lies. I've never claimed that the WSA is not valid for AMD anymore. Where did you get that from!?

From your post, where you said that AMD should have more freedom on the WSA.

 

[Fjodor2001]

From your post, where you said that AMD should have more freedom on the WSA.

Here is what I said:

-Since Samsung already has their 14 nm process up and running, AMD should not run into any problems producing the Greenland GPU or Zen CPU due to GF having problems implementing the 14 nm process.

-AMD will likely prefer to produce the 14 nm chips at GF anyway, since they have a WSA with GF.

-However AMD is not tied down by the WSA as much as before, since they e.g. can start producing the chips at Samsung and then later move production to GF.

So I did not say that AMD was "free" from the WSA or that it was no longer valid.

Instead I just said more or less exactly the same as the article did:

http://english.etnews.com/20151222200002

According to industries on the 21st, Samsung Electronics’ System LSI Foundry Business Department will start mass-producing AMD’s new GPU ‘Greenland (development code name)’ along with Global Foundry (GF) starting from 2nd quarter of 2016. Greenland will be produced from Gen. 2 14-nano FinFET LPP (Low Power Plus) processing and its electricity efficiency per watt is 2 times higher compared to 28-nano GPU (code name: Fiji) that is currently being sold in markets. Proportion of production supplies is very fluid as AMD will regulate proportion between 2 businesses according to many conditions such as yield and others.
[...]
After starting production of Greenland, AMD will put out its new CPU ‘Zen’ right after. This product is also produced from 14-nano LPP processing and will be produced by Samsung Electronics and GF just like GPU.

So what exactly is it you are objecting to?

 

[DrMrLordX]

Yes, I realize Bristol Ridge is coming to desktop.

But specifically the 4C 512sp and 4C 384sp dies don't make much sense on AM4. 512sp desktop iGPU in mid to late 2016 is not relevant for gaming when today's low profile cards are already faster.

For 35W mobile though, I can see Bristol Ridge quad core with iGPU with a potential niche against either 28W Intel GT3e or 15W Intel + GM108 DDR3 (ie, GT940M). In this scenario, the investment AMD made in integration makes a lot more sense.

Ugh. Look man:

http://www.dvhardware.net/article63592.html

They have FP4 Bristol Ridge coming. If you don't like AM4 APUs, don't buy them.

 

[MrTeal]

Ugh. Look man:

http://www.dvhardware.net/article63592.html

They have FP4 Bristol Ridge coming. If you don't like AM4 APUs, don't buy them.

I would have though the most interesting part about Bristol Ridge was getting a first glimpse of the AM4 platform. Otherwise, four Excavator cores and up to 512 GCN 1.2 shaders on 28nm just doesn't seem that interesting.

 

[mrmt]

Here is what I said:

So I did not say that AMD was "free" from the WSA or that it was no longer valid.

Instead I just said more or less exactly the same as the article did:

http://english.etnews.com/20151222200002

So what exactly is it you are objecting to?

The article is putting a lot of unproven affirmations (For example, the wafer allocation between Samsung and GLF, or that Zen production schedule would have anything to do with their GPU) based on unproven assumptions (That AMD is able to manage something at all in terms of allocation). But what's there to oppose if that makes AMD's situation rosy?

 

[Shivansps]

Just look at happened to the cat family, Bay Trail wiped out the cat family despite the cat family not having a performance handicap, that happened because of the better cost structure and Intel willingness to get the market for itself (and pay the price for it), the same will happen if AMD go for better CPU performance but without a better cost structure to back it up.

No, they where not, the cat family was killed by Intel ULV SB/IB Celerons. By the time BT launched, AMD cat family had virtually no market left.

 

[mrmt]

No, they where not, the cat family was killed by Intel ULV SB/IB Celerons. By the time BT launched, AMD cat family had virtually no market left.

I don't remember AMD management complaining about Intel aggressiveness on the bottom market when ULV Celeron and Pentium were launched, but I do remember Devinder Kumar doing so by the time of Bay Trail launch. I also saw cat laptops disappear and be replaced by Bay Trail laptops two quarters after Bay Trail launch.

 

[cbn]

I would have though the most interesting part about Bristol Ridge was getting a first glimpse of the AM4 platform.

That is true, but AMD can do this with 2C 384sp and Athlon x 4 Bristol Ridge processors.

Otherwise, four Excavator cores and up to 512 GCN 1.2 shaders on 28nm just doesn't seem that interesting.

Agreed. And I am concerned diverting 4C 512sp to AM4 would even hurt their mobile efforts.

AMD doesn't have the laptop volume to play that game. They aren't Intel.

P.S. What would actually be interesting for APU desktop would be affordable Mini-ITX and just using a BGA mobile processor works better for that (in most cases) anyway (re: 1.) No additional I/O hub that the AM4 platform uses and 2.) lower power circuitry requirements since it wouldn't have to be provisioned to cover the future needs of a 95W Zen CPU)

 

[Fjodor2001]

The article is putting a lot of unproven affirmations (For example, the wafer allocation between Samsung and GLF, or that Zen production schedule would have anything to do with their GPU) based on unproven assumptions (That AMD is able to manage something at all in terms of allocation). But what's there to oppose if that makes AMD's situation rosy?

Then you should write the author of the article and voice your opinion, letting him/her you know what sources you have that are better stating the opposite. But I doubt you have any. Regardless, don't shoot the messenger citing the article, me that is. And don't say I'm just doing baseless speculation without any sources to back it up, like you lied about me doing.

 

[Fjodor2001]

I am interested in these facts, can you post links to the info or post it here directly.

I am also interested in this.

@ShintaiDK/mrmt: What are your sources to back up your claims?

 

[dark zero]

No, they where not, the cat family was killed by Intel ULV SB/IB Celerons. By the time BT launched, AMD cat family had virtually no market left.

UlV Celerons weren't as great since they were as fast as the cat family... the Cat family was killed by the worst piece of sh** ever released... the MONOcore AMD E1 2100, who was lagging on NES emulator, far worse than VIA C3 and was infamous worse than the C50 and used in almost every AMD laptop. As infamous as Superman 64 and Hong Kong 97.

 

[mrmt]

Then you should write the author of the article and voice your opinion, letting him/her you know what sources you have that are better stating the opposite. But I doubt you have any. Regardless, don't shoot the messenger citing the article, me that is. And don't say I'm just doing baseless speculation without any sources to back it up, like you lied about me doing.

We have Devinder Kumar saying basically that AMD has no control on where to produce MPUs, and that's the last official information investors got.

OTOH we had a pie-in-the-sky news story from some obscure website that disclose no sources and quotes no AMD executives, making it as baseless as it could be. The fact that you are quoting this baseless source doesn't make the source any more authoritative or you any less baseless.

 

[DrMrLordX]

That is true, but AMD can do this with 2C 384sp and Athlon x 4 Bristol Ridge processors.

The Bristol Ridge Athlons are more likely to show up on FM2+. To hell with 1m/2t desktop chips on AM4. AiOs can use the FP4 chips just as well as anything else.

 

[Fjodor2001]

We have Devinder Kumar saying basically that AMD has no control on where to produce MPUs, and that's the last official information investors got.

Can you please show us where Devinder Kumar (at a date after when the article was posted) explicitly says that the article is incorrect?

OTOH we had a pie-in-the-sky news story from some obscure website that disclose no sources and quotes no AMD executives, making it as baseless as it could be. The fact that you are quoting this baseless source doesn't make the source any more authoritative or you any less baseless.

Some obscure website? How about these:

https://news.google.com/news/story?...ved=0ahUKEwjb6czy6JPKAhUCBiwKHaenBw4QqgIIKTAA

Reuters, Hexus, Engadget, Inquirer, the list goes on...

 

[mrmt]

Can you please show us where Devinder Kumar (at a date after when the article was posted) explicitly says that the article is incorrect?

It is supposed to be the other way around, isn't it? If some cheapskate site is saying that AMD official information is no longer valid then they should put either credible sources or have a lot of credibility to put it at stake, this site has none of it and Kumar does not have to comment on every pie-in-the-sky AMD news.

https://news.google.com/news/story?...ved=0ahUKEwjb6czy6JPKAhUCBiwKHaenBw4QqgIIKTAA

Reuters, Hexus, Engadget, Inquirer, the list goes on...

I'm not questioning that Samsung is manufacturing chips for AMD, but that AMD was free to make that choice and will control any allocation at all. Given the previous disclosures about the WSA, that would make a departure of the previous terms, and since AMD didn't disclose any amendment as of lately then this possibility is highly unlikely.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Can you please show us where Devinder Kumar (at a date after when the article was posted) explicitly says that the article is incorrect?

You cant be serious. D: