[pcgamesn] AMD is giving Threadripper 2 moar cores and a top TDP of 250W

[dacostafilipe]

Source: https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd-threadripper-2-moar-cores

AMD will be upping the core-count on its upcoming Threadripper 2 processors when they launch in August. Motherboard and cooler manufacturers have been working on new products to comply with the chips' new specs and are adding in extra energy headroom to cope with the demands of what is surely Threadripper 2’s extra cores.

 

[scannall]

Source: https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd-threadripper-2-moar-cores

Not buying it. That would require a new die.

 

[mattiasnyc]

Not buying it. That would require a new die.

it probably is meant to be read "threadripper 2" + "more cores".... Not "2 more cores"...

 

[scannall]

it probably is meant to be read "threadripper 2" + "more cores".... Not "2 more cores"...

Possibly. Adding a CCX to the die would likely be easier. For a 24 core monster.
We'll see. Exciting times ahead. ;-)

 

[CatMerc]

More cores would require a new motherboard due to the memory channels.

 

[dacostafilipe]

Same here, I think TR 2xxx will "only" be Zen+ dies on the actual Platform.

Without having new dies, a >16 cores TR would require 4 Zepline dies. This would require a new substrate (Epyc can't be used because 8ch MC) and would limit the Zepline dies to a single MC, what would certainly have an impact on performance.

That said, because AMD will not release Epyc with Zen+ dies, could it be that they plan a X499 , 8ch MC platform for those Epyc Zen+ derivates?

 

[scannall]

More cores would require a new motherboard due to the memory channels.

Only if they added a third die to the package. Adding a CCX to each die would keep the same memory channels. But, as always with rumors, take them with a large grain of salt.

 

[CatMerc]

Only if they added a third die to the package. Adding a CCX to each die would keep the same memory channels. But, as always with rumors, take them with a large grain of salt.

Adding a CCX would require a new die, something I 100% doubt they'd do for Threadripper. It will most likely reuse the dies from Zen+.

 

[wahdangun]

Same here, I think TR 2xxx will "only" be Zen+ dies on the actual Platform.

Without having new dies, a >16 cores TR would require 4 Zepline dies. This would require a new substrate (Epyc can't be used because 8ch MC) and would limit the Zepline dies to a single MC, what would certainly have an impact on performance.

That said, because AMD will not release Epyc with Zen+ dies, could it be that they plan a X499 , 8ch MC platform for those Epyc Zen+ derivates?

There is no 12 nm EPYC+ they straight to 7nm.

So maybe in q4 this year they can release TR with EPYC 7nm based die, and increase core count and performance substantially.

 

[maddie]

There is no 12 nm EPYC+ they straight to 7nm.

So maybe in q4 this year they can release TR with EPYC 7nm based die, and increase core count and performance substantially.

This thinking makes the most sense.

Anyone expecting a custom die for Threadripper is delusional.

 

[coercitiv]

Gamers Nexus says 24c TR2.

 

[tamz_msc]

Gamers Nexus says 24c TR2.

The only way that might happen is if TR2 is actually Zen 2, which is unlikely. To do 24 cores, the only logical way to do it would be the Epyc configuration, and going that route more than halves the bandwidth of the inter-die data fabric due it it being split among four dies instead of two.

 

[EXCellR8]

I want one of those anti-static mats but LOL @ $100

 

[CatMerc]

The only way that might happen is if TR2 is actually Zen 2, which is unlikely. To do 24 cores, the only logical way to do it would be the Epyc configuration, and going that route more than halves the bandwidth of the inter-die data fabric due it it being split among four dies instead of two.

Or if it's a new motherboard. Don't need Zen 2 to achieve this config.

As for the bandwidth, it was a "might as well" move from AMD. The bandwidth provided to EPYC is already described as "over provisioned". The extra Threadripper links likely don't do much in reality.

 

[tamz_msc]

Or if it's a new motherboard. Don't need Zen 2 to achieve this config.

As for the bandwidth, it was a "might as well" move from AMD. The bandwidth provided to EPYC is already described as "over provisioned". The extra Threadripper links likely don't do much in reality.

Hopefully we'll get to know in a few hours time.

 

[LightningZ71]

I think the biggest likelihood is for TR2 to be just like TR1, but with binned and power pushed zen+ dies with a Max boost in the 4.4-4.6ghz range. Those speeds will generate a lot of heat and power demand, thus the higher tdp.

Less likely, TR2 is zen+ based, but is available in a Max cores configuration that has the two dark dies enabled and connected to the other two dies, but with no local ram channels. It's a 4ch package, each die is configured for 6 active cores at maximum achievable clocks.

Least likely, TR2 uses a new mcm. The package is essentially EPYC with zen+ cores, 4 enabled dies, each with only one active channel, and only 64 pcie lanes. They can make any core combination they want. The new mcm remains compatible with existing TR sockets. Those memory channels would have some interesting routing in the mcm.

 

[mattiasnyc]

https://wccftech.com/amd-2nd-gen-ryzen-threadripper-32-core-64-thread-flagship-cpu-computex/

 

[eek2121]

https://wccftech.com/amd-2nd-gen-ryzen-threadripper-32-core-64-thread-flagship-cpu-computex/

You actually read wccftech?

Threadripper 2 will feature 16 cores. Any increase in cores would have to be done in the CCX due to socket compatibility. However, adding cores would increase memory and L3 latency and lower clock speeds. PCGamesN and WCCTech are both not reliable sites. Links to them should be banned IMO.

EDIT: AMD is not going to spring for a new platform/die configuration either. They are looking to increase margins. Whether or not we will get the 2800X is up for debate, but the 2900X, 2920X, and 2950X are not. Same configuration as last year....only faster.

 

[IEC]

Hot off the press: Threadripper 2 to feature up to 32 cores:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12906/amd-reveals-threadripper-2-up-to-32-cores-250w-x399-refresh

4 active dies
2 dies with dual memory channels each
2 dies without direct memory access (+latency)

 

[mattiasnyc]

You actually read wccftech?

Occasionally.

The thing with sources is that when they're questionable you can still figure out if there's anything there worth 'ingesting'. When a source like that reports from an event it's far less likely to be bogus compared to them just quoting an unnamed source.

In addition to AnandTech I also found TechReport's report on it.

Threadripper 2 will feature 16 cores.

It fascinates me how some can be so certain of these things, yet clearly without having the knowledge to be that certain.

Any increase in cores would have to be done in the CCX due to socket compatibility.

I guess not.

PCGamesN and WCCTech are both not reliable sites. Links to them should be banned IMO.

Or, you know, you could have said "Thanks, guess my certain proclamations of what AMD would bring was wrong. Now I know." Followed by a thumbs-up emoticon.

EDIT: AMD is not going to spring for a new platform/die configuration either. They are looking to increase margins. Whether or not we will get the 2800X is up for debate, but the 2900X, 2920X, and 2950X are not. Same configuration as last year....only faster.

You should tell AMD it's not up for debate. I honestly don't understand how you can be so certain about these things....

But seriously, it's not unthinkable that the 2900x, 2920x and 2950x are "merely" updated Zen+ Threadrippers, whereas there are added to the TR lineup, with 24 and 32 cores respectively.

 

[StinkyPinky]

https://wccftech.com/amd-2nd-gen-ryzen-threadripper-32-core-64-thread-flagship-cpu-computex/

Crazy. The issue with the design though is the latency is not addressed at all. In fact, it may be worse.

 

[Shamrock]

You actually read wccftech?

Threadripper 2 will feature 16 cores. Any increase in cores would have to be done in the CCX due to socket compatibility. However, adding cores would increase memory and L3 latency and lower clock speeds. PCGamesN and WCCTech are both not reliable sites. Links to them should be banned IMO.

EDIT: AMD is not going to spring for a new platform/die configuration either. They are looking to increase margins. Whether or not we will get the 2800X is up for debate, but the 2900X, 2920X, and 2950X are not. Same configuration as last year....only faster.

Well, if you don't like wccftech, then how about pcgamer?
https://www.pcgamer.com/let-the-cor...ps-intel-with-32-core-ryzen-threadripper-cpu/

 

[The Stilt]

Hot off the press: Threadripper 2 to feature up to 32 cores:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12906/amd-reveals-threadripper-2-up-to-32-cores-250w-x399-refresh

4 active dies
2 dies with dual memory channels each
2 dies without direct memory access (+latency)

There has to be 1 DPC 8CH TR4 boards incoming for these CPUs, as otherwise they'll be the most futile consumer HEDT CPUs ever released.
A 4P CPU with half of the cores having no local DRAM available, meaning the memory accesses will be routed through GMI interface (> 120ns on top of the normal latency) to the cores with the memory present.

 

[IEC]

Crazy. The issue with the design though is the latency is not addressed at all. In fact, it may be worse.

If you're buying 32 cores and they're not branded Epyc, you probably don't care much about the memory latency - you care about core throughput. Which a 250W TDP platform with 4x binned 2700X dies would bring in spades. No one buys a 32 core CPU for gaming.

 

[IEC]

There has to be 1 DPC 8CH TR4 boards incoming for these CPUs, as otherwise they'll be the most futile consumer HEDT CPUs ever released.
A 4P CPU with half of the cores having no local DRAM available, meaning the memory accesses will be routed through GMI interface (> 120ns on top of the normal latency) to the cores with the memory present.

I suspect you are correct. We will see.