MSI Drops First Hint of AMD Increasing AM4 CPU Core Counts

[csbin]

https://www.techpowerup.com/246100/msi-drops-first-hint-of-amd-increasing-am4-cpu-core-counts

With Intel frantically working on an 8-core socket LGA1151 processor to convincingly beat the 8-core AMD Ryzen 2000 series processor, AMD could be working on the next cycle of core-count increases for the mainstream-desktop platform. Motherboard maker MSI may have dropped the first hint that AMD is bringing >8 cores to the socket AM4 mainstream-desktop platform by mentioning that its upcoming motherboards based on the AMD B450 chipset support 8-core "and up" CPU in a marketing video.

AMD will get its next opportunity to tinker with key aspects of its CPU micro-architecture with "Zen 2," being built on the 7 nm silicon fabrication process. If it decides to stick with the CCX approach to multi-core processors, the company could increase per-CCX core counts. A 50 percent core-count increase enables 12-core processors, while a 100 percent increase brings 16-cores to the AM4 platform. MSI video confirms that these >8-core processors will have backwards-compatibility with existing 400-series chipsets, even if they launch alongside newer 500-series chipset.

rumor：https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1884097-1-1.html

Zen2：AM4（Max 16C32T）TR4（Max 32C64T）SP3（Max 64C128T）

 

[LTC8K6]

Could you have power problems and memory bandwidth problems if you go to a lot more cores on existing boards? Even at 7nm?

 

[csbin]

Could you have power problems and memory bandwidth problems if you go to a lot more cores on existing boards? Even at 7nm?

6700K 4C8T 91W
7700K 4C8T 91W
8700K 6C12T 95W
9900K 8C16T 95W

7900X 10C20T 140W
7980XE 18C36T 165W

 

[Batboy88]

Well we can't figure out how to make stronger Lesser cores again...so lets just use more of them stuff.

 

[LTC8K6]

So you are saying existing AMD AM4 boards are designed for the higher power requirements, and dual channel ram will not be a problem going from 8 cores to 16 cores?

( I doubt the 8/16 CFL chip is going to be 95W unless clocks are disappointing)

 

[cortexa99]

I'm late to the original chiphell post, seems the author from chiphell also quote other sources but he modified, the source also said exact core count of Zen2.

But more important is another guy in same thread hint Zen2 to have much higher DRAM frequency support(OC 4000MHZ+) but it seems it require new mobo. That means you could have more cores with current mobo(b350, x470 etc) but when comes to DRAM you have to get new mobo to OC higher.

These are the main content of that chiphell thread. I could translate&tell you all when having some news.

 

[happy medium]

16 cores? For what?
Even 8 cores is too many for gamers.

 

[Bouowmx]

"8 cores and up CPU"
shows VRM with 7 inductors
ok

 

[LightningZ71]

While the VRMs on most of the B450 boards that I've seen are rather... unimpressive... I don't have any problem believing that people will find a use for greater than 8 cores on an AM4 socket. As we've seen, the performance gains on the 2700x between using DDR4-2400 to 3600 is modest at best unless your specific application is heavily memory bandwidth bound. Adding 50% to 100% more cores won't bring everything to a grinding halt. Heck, as we've seen tested with Threadrippers, when only one chip has its two channels populated on the 1950x, the performance drop off on most tasks isn't even that significant, and half of those cores are having to access DRAM via the inter-chip connection for extra latency. If AMD can get 16 cores on Zen2 chips, and perhaps even use some of the extra die area for an L4, I think most people will be extremely happy with the performance. Even better if they can do all that, and still maintain clocks to where they currently area or even grow them a few hundred Mhz. Remember, this is at 7nm. While it won't bring major frequency improvements over GF12nm, it will bring a significant density improvement and scale power usage a usable amount.

Now for the painful part, the price. 16 cores aren't going to be free. I suspect that the 8 core parts will stay around $300. 12 core parts should push into the $450 price range, and 16 core parts will easily be north of $550. I see the product stack shaking out like this, assuming that the chip is 16 cores (4 x 4 core CCX)
R3-3300 4/4 1/2 L3-16MB
R3-3400 4/8 1/2 L3-16MB
R5-3500 8/8 1/2 L3-16MB
R5-3600 8/16 1/2 L3-16MB
R7-3700 12/24 Full L3-32MB
R7-3800 16/32 Full L3-32MB

On the off chance that they do decide to incorporate an L4, I can imagine that it would be enabled only on the X versions of the desktop chips. It would likely be inclusive, and, to be effective, it would need to be 2X L2 size. So, for the 4 and 8 core parts, you'd have half of it enabled, so, 32MB of L4 cache, and for 12+ core parts, you'd have 64MB. There is enough space on 7nm to incorporate an L4 cache of usable size and still stay under the total die size for 12nm Summit Ridge. Think of the implications for EPYC, a full fat EPYC chip would have 64 cores, 128 threads, 128MB of L3 Cache, and 256MB of L4 cache. A 2P system would have 128 cores, 256 threads, and monster capabilities.

For the bottom of the stack, they can continue to use Raven Ridge at 14nm, then the 12nm refresh as 3300G for 4/4 and 3400G for 4/8.

 

[Cerb]

Could you have power problems and memory bandwidth problems if you go to a lot more cores on existing boards? Even at 7nm?

Power: doubtful, for boards that are already built to overclock. Power requirements, like we had with the Phenom II and Bulldozer lineup would hardly be the end of the world, for cheap boards.

Memory: maybe for some tasks, but dual-channel has handled pretty beefy systems in the past. Plus, reduced scaling compared to server and HEDT sockets would still result in better bang/buck, even when RAM becomes a limiting factor.

 

[Cerb]

16 cores? For what?
Even 8 cores is too many for gamers.

Content creation, CPU-based mining, distributed computing (non-mining)...

 

[ZGR]

So you are saying existing AMD AM4 boards are designed for the higher power requirements, and dual channel ram will not be a problem going from 8 cores to 16 cores?

( I doubt the 8/16 CFL chip is going to be 95W unless clocks are disappointing)

It seems flashed Z170 and Z270 boards have no problem running the 8700k, so I see why not other than extreme overclocking.

As for bandwidth, fast dual channel DDR4 is nearly indistinguishable vs quad channel in a lot of situations. Sure, I bet a 16c would benefit in many workloads from quad channel, but in many others, low latency is far more important.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Now for the painful part, the price. 16 cores aren't going to be free. I suspect that the 8 core parts will stay around $300. 12 core parts should push into the $450 price range, and 16 core parts will easily be north of $550.

16 Zen2 cores for $550 seems a fair deal. At least from my perspective.

A 1950x is $699.99 on newegg right now. Even at that price, the Zen2 AM4 version seems a very reasonable deal considering TR4 mainboards are much more expensive.

 

[NostaSeronx]

16 cores? For what?
Even 8 cores is too many for gamers.

As resolutions increase the need of multi-monitor productivity decreases. While, it also can enhance multi-monitor productivity. Data entry becomes really easy if you can simply copy and paste. Opening windows and closing windows are generally bad in a productivity scenario. More browser/work windows and less tabs makes productivity faster.

-> All windows must be open and active.
-> There can't be lag from a >dual-core system. Lag means you can't speedrun work.
-> More work done in less time, means efficiency. (The end goal is to get out of work as fast as possible. As work is awful and if its slow it feels like hell.)

 

[ChiefBigFeather]

This is great news. It probably means more L3 cache. I love L3 cache.

 

[Lovec1990]

I belive AMD will offer 12c/24t in 2019 as AM4 flagship but in other hand 16c/32t would be great if frequencies could go high enough too be good for gaming

 

[jackstar7]

16 cores? For what?
Even 8 cores is too many for gamers.

"No one needs more than 4GB of Ram."



to be clear: /s

 

[Batboy88]

That has been sort of a Disappointment too with AM4...a lot of B boards nothing real fascinating with Power Delivery...but yeah there is some nicer and better examples, moved onward x370 etc

 

[Abwx]

"8 cores and up CPU"
shows VRM with 7 inductors
ok

The company’s 7 nm fabrication process is projected to bring over a 40% frequency potential over the 14LPP manufacturing technology that GlobalFoundries uses today, assuming the same transistor count and power. The tech will also reduce the power consumption of ICs by 60% at the same frequency and complexity.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1155...nm-plans-three-generations-700-mm-hvm-in-2018

 

[LTC8K6]

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1155...nm-plans-three-generations-700-mm-hvm-in-2018

So for a realistic number we'll divide by 4.

 

[Abwx]

So for a realistic number we'll divide by 4.

No, because it would be a disaster lawsuit wise...

Beside this 2.5x power reduction is the corrolary of the 1.4x better perf at same frequency.

With just those two numbers we can get the relative voltage/frequency curve of the process, in this case ln(2.5)/ln(1.4) = 2.723, wich mean that power increase as a 2.723 power exponent in respect of frequency, from wich one can easily sort the relative voltage delta in function of the relative frequency delta.

 

[Batboy88]

As resolutions increase the need of multi-monitor productivity decreases. While, it also can enhance multi-monitor productivity. Data entry becomes really easy if you can simply copy and paste. Opening windows and closing windows are generally bad in a productivity scenario. More browser/work windows and less tabs makes productivity faster.

-> All windows must be open and active.
-> There can't be lag from a >dual-core system. Lag means you can't speedrun work.
-> More work done in less time, means efficiency. (The end goal is to get out of work as fast as possible. As work is awful and if its slow it feels like hell.)

Exactly and what like 80% of anything else you'd want to do is fine as well....You're at Home dude....But they all wanting to be Commando Super Comp stuff.

 

[happy medium]

As resolutions increase the need of multi-monitor productivity decreases. While, it also can enhance multi-monitor productivity. Data entry becomes really easy if you can simply copy and paste. Opening windows and closing windows are generally bad in a productivity scenario. More browser/work windows and less tabs makes productivity faster.

-> All windows must be open and active.
-> There can't be lag from a >dual-core system. Lag means you can't speedrun work.
-> More work done in less time, means efficiency. (The end goal is to get out of work as fast as possible. As work is awful and if its slow it feels like hell.)

What the Threadripper line for then?
I thought these were MAINSTREAM chips.
Web browsing, a little video editing, gaming, streaming and such.
Point is, whats the point?
Will we really need 16 cores, even 6 is good for the next year or so.
8 is more than enough.

I'd much rather have 8 cores ,20% higher IPC, @ 4.8ghz.
That's the target audience.

 

[PeterScott]

What the Threadripper line for then?
I thought these were MAINSTREAM chips.
Web browsing, a little video editing, gaming, streaming and such.
Point is, whats the point?
Will we really need 16 cores, even 6 is good for the next year or so.
8 is more than enough.

I'd much rather have 8 cores ,20% higher IPC, @ 4.8ghz.
That's the target audience.

6 Cores are good for the for foreseeable future. Which might have a 5 year horizon. After that more specialized cores might start making more sense than just more general purpose cores. I like a bunch of AI cores to go with the general purpose cores.

 

[Batboy88]

What the Threadripper line for then?
I thought these were MAINSTREAM chips.
Web browsing, a little video editing, gaming, streaming and such.
Point is, whats the point?
Will we really need 16 cores, even 6 is good for the next year or so.
8 is more than enough.

I'd much rather have 8 cores ,20% higher IPC, @ 4.8ghz.
That's the target audience.

Still quite a select audience Probably. But yeah would be a Blast to play with.