moinmoin
Diamond Member
- Jun 1, 2017
- 4,182
- 6,260
- 136
And Intel really didn't waste time getting one such on board after AMD had one. AMD is quite lucky in that regard.Strangely enough, Intel is facing the same one fool nightmare.
And Intel really didn't waste time getting one such on board after AMD had one. AMD is quite lucky in that regard.Strangely enough, Intel is facing the same one fool nightmare.
Renoir don't need to match Picasso in TF, Navi performs better than Vega anyway.I just don't see a lot of room for improvement for AMD's APUs on the desktop. I think it was D8auer that produced the youtube video that demonstrated a whole slew of overclocking results for a 2400G with different memory sticks at different timings. When pushed from 1500 to 1600 Mhz, he saw very little performance increase. When pushing the RAM past 3200 to 3400 and trying to tighten the timings, he was also seeing very little improvement. For the APU in Renoir to exceed the TFlops in Vega 11 at 1.6Ghz, it needs to be North of 2.0Ghz. So, even if we manage to see the desktop APUs pushing DDR4 at 4266 on two channels, at just 2.1Ghz, its only really addressing the VRAM bandwidth starvation problem by roughly 30% over VEGA 11 with 3200 DDR4 and not making any significant gains on actual iGPU core video computation throughput.
I'm going to be quite shocked if desktop Renoir exceeds Picasso performance by more than 20% when the performance limit is entirely iGPU related. On titles that are CPU starved, or that were hitting thermal/power walls on Picasso, Renoir should show significant improvements.
Where am I saying 'substantial change to the architecture'? Don't you understand that sometimes a single critical pathway can undermine everything else? Maybe the clock signals weren't propagating correctly to all areas preventing the ramping of frequency, maybe whatever.Well, i dont think anybody considers Vega at 2.1Ghz stock on an APU as not suprising. When we discussed this a few months ago we were talking about 1.7Ghz with 2.0Ghz being possible with OC. Now we are talking about 2.5Ghz as possible with OC, how this is not a suprise to you?
And im sorry, but wharever AMD did to Vega they did not announce it, the only thing we know is that they clock higher, any sustancial change to the arch would have caused at minimum a name change to "Vega 2" or something to draw attention to it, not sweep it under the rub.
Do you think he might join raja koduri and jim keller at intel ?Hector is still available.
I agree with you. It's just that people will stay cautious given AMD's history.AMD is now a world class semiconductor manufacturer again (albeit, a bit on the small side compared to rivals). I think their odds of shooting themselves in the foot have greatly diminished compared to the past.
Renoir is Vega, not Navi.Renoir don't need to match Picasso in TF, Navi performs better than Vega anyway.
The Navi IGP just needs more memory bandwidth. With DDR5 can't expect a good improvement?
Intel has likely learned that Hector is more useful to them working for a competitor.Do you think he might join raja koduri and jim keller at intel ?![]()
Remember you still need to compare Picassos to similar products, Vega 8@2.1Ghz is, most likely, a Ryzen 7 product. Probably the 4700G pictured here due to the code number:I just don't see a lot of room for improvement for AMD's APUs on the desktop. I think it was D8auer that produced the youtube video that demonstrated a whole slew of overclocking results for a 2400G with different memory sticks at different timings. When pushed from 1500 to 1600 Mhz, he saw very little performance increase. When pushing the RAM past 3200 to 3400 and trying to tighten the timings, he was also seeing very little improvement. For the APU in Renoir to exceed the TFlops in Vega 11 at 1.6Ghz, it needs to be North of 2.0Ghz. So, even if we manage to see the desktop APUs pushing DDR4 at 4266 on two channels, at just 2.1Ghz, its only really addressing the VRAM bandwidth starvation problem by roughly 30% over VEGA 11 with 3200 DDR4 and not making any significant gains on actual iGPU core video computation throughput.
I'm going to be quite shocked if desktop Renoir exceeds Picasso performance by more than 20% when the performance limit is entirely iGPU related. On titles that are CPU starved, or that were hitting thermal/power walls on Picasso, Renoir should show significant improvements.
But he already have a good resume in selling fabs that don't work properly, he could help them doing a fire sale to some asian or arab country so they can get rid of those beautiful 10nm facilities.Intel has likely learned that Hector is more useful to them working for a competitor.
Hmmmm. You might be on to something.But he already have a good resume in selling fabs that don't work properly, he could help them doing a fire sale to some asian or arab country so they can get rid of those beautiful 10nm facilities.![]()
At stock I'd imagine about on par. You'll be able to overclock these I'm certain though, I wouldn't be surprised if a 2.3GHz OC on the iGPU's is standard for Renoir.Remember you still need to compare Picassos to similar products, Vega 8@2.1Ghz is, most likely, a Ryzen 7 product. Probably the 4700G pictured here due to the code number:
![]()
![]()
AMD Ryzen 7 4700G "Renoir" Desktop Processor Pictured
Here is the first picture of the AMD Ryzen 7 4700G, the company's upcoming socket AM4 APU based on the 7 nm "Renoir" silicon, courtesy of VideoCardz. The picture reveals a standard-looking socket AM4 chip with commercial name and OPN markings (100-000000146), matching the Igor's Lab OPN code...www.techpowerup.com
With one of the Ryzen 7 revealed, the 4400G could be the #143 Vega 7 @ 1.9Ghz... it should perform better than Vega 11@1.4Ghz, but not sure by how much.
Thats for sure, Vega 11 can get to 1750mhz max, while these Renoirs may be able to hit 2.5ghz. Another advantage for Renoir is memory support, getting anything over DDR4-3200 to work with Picasso for more than a few benchmarks is really difficult, in contrast these Renoirs may be able to hit DDR4-4266 on 1:1 fabric... not even Matisse can do that.At stock I'd imagine about on par. You'll be able to overclock these I'm certain though, I wouldn't be surprised if a 2.3GHz OC on the iGPU's is standard for Renoir.
Name: Vermeer (VMR)
Family: 19h
Models: 20h-2Fh
CPUID: 0xa20f00
OPN 1: 100-000000063-07_46/40_N
OPN 2: 100-000000063-08_46/40_Y
OPN 3: 100-000000063-23_44/38_N
Revision: A0
Cores: 8
Threads: 16
BTW these are A0 samples, things could still change(improve?)OPN 1: 100-000000059-14_46/37_Y
OPN 2: 100-000000059-15_46/37_N
Revision: A0
Cores: 16
Threads: 32
This could impact latency positively. (aside of the downside of the lack of BC for non X570 boards)As far as the 500 chipset and backward compatibility of the Ryzen 4000 series is concerned, some OEMs are arguing with regard to the Renior APUs with details like the increased FCLK, which would at least make stable operation on certain older boards more difficult. For the Ryzen 4000 “Vermeer” CPUs with the changed architecture, it is said that it is not so much the chipset itself but the current motherboard layout that is the reason why the upcoming CPUs will not be able to run on the old hardware in this way. Nobody could (or wanted to) say whether there have been any major changes in the pin assignment, the general external circuitry or the new power supply specifications.
That is my suspicion. Not much extra max boost, but higher sustainable MT clocks.if AMD learnt from its fiasco with Zen2 should be a more sustainable boost.
I mean, they certainly did with Renoir. Renoir can actually peak above the rated boost clocks by 100mhz on all the R7 and up skus. I'm really hoping they do the same for VermeerSlight clock bumps, 200 MHz Base while Boost remain the same which if AMD learnt from its fiasco with Zen2 should be a more sustainable boost.
Probably, it's A0 silicon (and Renoir for instance shipped with A1). They might get maybe 100 Mhz more out of boost clocks with A1, but I wouldn't count on it. Doesn't really matter as well. If the rumored IPC gains are true and the clocks are actually sustainably reachable (unlike top-end zen2) it's still considerable upgrade.It's going to be a beautiful autumn for PC enthusiasts, a real generational jumps with new CPU and GPU parts from AMD. I'm ready and waiting with x570 and 1600AF to tide me over
PS Those base/boost clocks seem to be near final, that's what I heard.
The base clock increase should really improve MT results when coupled with the IPC increase.Slight clock bumps, 200 MHz Base while Boost remain the same which if AMD learnt from its fiasco with Zen2 should be a more sustainable boost.
I hope so too. IMO AMD should bring back the XFR moniker from Zen 1 era (+100 Mhz opportunitic "bonus" non-guaranteed boost). It was quite easy to understand and also useful for describing AMDs boost behaviour.I mean, they certainly did with Renoir. Renoir can actually peak above the rated boost clocks by 100mhz on all the R7 and up skus. I'm really hoping they do the same for Vermeer
If both are true we get another generation of 6 core chips performing like 8 core chips in multi-core workloads.If the rumored IPC gains are true and the clocks are actually sustainably reachable (unlike top-end zen2) it's still considerable upgrade.
Well, it is very logical 4.6ghz is singlecore boost no doubt.4.6Ghz , sustained boost speed ?