- Jan 24, 2014
Maybe now, in the wake of AMDs CES presentation of Zen 2, people will finally understand Sunny Cove on 14nm would do little to keep the competition in check.Sunny Cove, even if it achieved it's perf. / clock goals, will use inherently more power to run at iso clocks (efficiency may hopefully go up, but absolute power will definitely go up). Couple that with 9900K being already very power constrained, and it should be immediately obvious that both base clocks and sustainable all-core boost clocks are bound to come down. So even by staying on 14nm the new design will lose clocks. (except for the single-core marketing figure, that can stay nice and pretty - and mostly useless)
Delivering desktop Sunny Cove on 14nm is just as big of a compromise as it would be on their unrefined 10nm, it will affect high core count throughput just as badly, if not worse.
The 8C/16C Zen 2 sample matched 9900K @ 4.7Ghz performance in CB15 while using considerably lower power and running bellow final clocks. As it stands now, with the first 7nm performance numbers at hand, I find it even harder to believe a functional 10nm would bring about a big drop in frequency. Even if it's a best case scenario, Zen 2 peformance in CB15 can't be all IPC driven, there has to be a decent jump in frequency too, which means TSMC is likely delivering 4.5Ghz+ on 7nm.