Veradun
Senior member
- Jul 29, 2016
- 564
- 780
- 136
Is N6 ready tho?Well, nobody ever publicly stated that 7nm+ would refer to N7+, AMD could have moved to N6 instead optimizing the currently used N7.
Is N6 ready tho?Well, nobody ever publicly stated that 7nm+ would refer to N7+, AMD could have moved to N6 instead optimizing the currently used N7.
No idea. I assumed since N5 is already in mass production N6 would be as well (tape out was possible starting a year ago). Good question.Is N6 ready tho?
It never made sense for them to change the process node, even to n7+ or n7p. They had too many improvements in the base design and too little time between launches to do that. Plus the cost of designing and implementing the new tooling, especially the new EUV tooling, when they already have tooling and design processes for the n7 process they are using on all their other projects. It never really made sense, but I can understand why the thought of new processes would excite some people enough to hope for those changes.Yeah, that to me is probably the most surprising info from the event: After all these years teasing 7nm+ for Zen 3 it turned out to be some node optimizations by AMD itself, not a separate node by TSMC, and the Zen 2 XT chips are actually using those as well.
Well, with this Zen 3 is the first Zen gen not to change the node even though AMD did indicate earlier that a change would happen. Even Zen+ changed the node, even if it reused the mask unchanged and only had microcode changes on top of that.It never made sense for them to change the process node, even to n7+ or n7p. They had too many improvements in the base design and too little time between launches to do that. Plus the cost of designing and implementing the new tooling, especially the new EUV tooling, when they already have tooling and design processes for the n7 process they are using on all their other projects. It never really made sense, but I can understand why the thought of new processes would excite some people enough to hope for those changes.
What is something better? No idea really; I just have heard Linus Torvalds opinion and I also think that trying to make a cpu act like a gpu is probably a bad idea. It seems like Intel's kludge before they finally gave up and decided to design a gpu. Also, if they were going to support it, I would have expected it with the new architecture (Zen 3). I guess it may be plausible that they are waiting for Zen 4 (5 nm and chip stacking to deliver more bandwidth).
There would be some special programming required to make use of a GPU style compute unit, but I have to wonder how much AVX512 is actually just compiled with auto-vectorization from basic C++. I would expect most AVX512 use is through hand tuned low level libraries or it is HPC code that is also hand tuned. Making use of a cache coherent gpu compute unit wouldn't be much different as long as you supply the necessary libraries. There is probably some other possibilities with a chiplet gpu compute unit that is cache coherent; there is no unnecessary copying and latency could be very low.
That's some real dangerous talk here. If this was Path of Exile, I'd say your comment has a 13% chance to attract monsters from beyond.I noticed that ARM fanboys tried to hijack this thread again. I just wanted to point out that the A14 has less ST performance (or equal, depending on the benchmark) than TGL, and Zen 3 has more, so please go back to your own thread and leave this one to talk about AMD Zen 3.
What Mitigation you are talking about? 20% IPC increase is enough "mitigation"@uzzi38
Not using N7+, N7, or N7P? That's . . . odd. Might explain why AMD didn't get any all-core clock boosts with Vermeer over Matisse (in fact, they have regression). Totally unexpected. Hopefully the wider core design will help mitigate that. It's also an interesting opportunity for overclockers, especially if AMD has done anything to fight hotspotting.
I was gonna comment the exact same thing.What Mitigation you are talking about? 20% IPC increase is enough "mitigation"
Ahhh you mean that Zen 3 would have a higher IPC?I noticed that ARM fanboys tried to hijack this thread again. I just wanted to point out that the A14 has less ST performance (or equal, depending on the benchmark) than TGL, and Zen 3 has more, so please go back to your own thread and leave this one to talk about AMD Zen 3.
Ahhh you mean that Zen 3 would have a higher IPC?
Like this:
With that said, AMD is all we got at the moment for desktop. But team x86 is going to have to shape up soon, or else there will be competitive derivates of ARM incoming. I'm quite sure.
I'm in this thread because the 5000-series is closest in hand right now. Then can you be a bit worried at the same time? How is the x86 going to survive this time. All I want is greater performance, and AMD/Intel is going to have to release a heck of an improvement. I believe they both can feel the heat from the blowtorch. I hope we can see a new amdx64, or Core2duo moment in the upcoming years. The arm figures aren't trolling, it's a quite interesting subject to debate as well in the x86 environment. Like C2D, halving the frequency and still perform better than the fastest Prescott's of the time. Quite revolutionary.Again, this is an AMD thread. Feel free to create your own thread to continue spewing your bull...err I mean discussing this.
Arm has its use and AMD/Intel have theirs. You need to stay on topic and NOT talk about ARM.I'm in this thread because the 5000-series is closest in hand right now. Then can you be a bit worried at the same time? How is the x86 going to survive this time. All I want is greater performance, and AMD/Intel is going to have to release a heck of an improvement. I believe they both can feel the heat from the blowtorch. I hope we can see a new amdx64, or Core2duo moment in the upcoming years. The arm figures aren't trolling, it's a quite interesting subject to debate as well in the x86 environment. Like C2D, halving the frequency and still perform better than the fastest Prescott's of the time. Quite revolutionary.
I'm in this thread because the 5000-series is closest in hand right now. Then can you be a bit worried at the same time? How is the x86 going to survive this time. All I want is greater performance, and AMD/Intel is going to have to release a heck of an improvement. I believe they both can feel the heat from the blowtorch. I hope we can see a new amdx64, or Core2duo moment in the upcoming years. The arm figures aren't trolling, it's a quite interesting subject to debate as well in the x86 environment. Like C2D, halving the frequency and still perform better than the fastest Prescott's of the time. Quite revolutionary.
Try not to misinterpret me now.Arm has its use and AMD/Intel have theirs. You need to stay on topic and NOT talk about ARM.
As was already said Make your own ARM thread.
Just create a thread and title it: "ARM vs x86." Or, "ARM vs The World." Or, something along those lines. That should be all encompassing, I think?Try not to misinterpret me now.
If I start an ARM thread with this theme, my guess is that your response will be the same in that thread but in reverse short there after.
This is an AMD thread I believed, and my impression was that the area surrounding AMD was ok to discuss. But I get it, we should not talk about anything else than AMD and AMD only. Quite the narrow parameter, but I guess it's necessary if we don't want the thread to gallop away in the wrong direction.
is there some sort of sub forum for open discussions regarding more than one specific subject at a time?
We probably won't see any hide nor hair of the Cezanne APU until around new year or CES 2021 time - we already know that it will be a virtual conference so it's unlikely that the date will change.No indicators that Zen 3 mobile is at an IPC disadvantage to Zen 2 mobile and or Zen 3 desktop to Zen 3 mobile. (Referring to the APU and or SOC etc any additional embedded implementation etc) If anything the naming schema is just that, to represent parity between mobile components & 105W TDP counterparts. I'm sure whatever loss or attrition for sake of thermals will be minor.
Well if you had just inserted the same image not just 2 times but a 3rd time as well, maybe you would have understood the difference between IPC and ST performance, which he wrote.Ahhh you mean that Zen 3 would have a higher IPC?
Like this:
With that said, AMD is all we got at the moment for desktop. But team x86 is going to have to shape up soon, or else there will be competitive derivates of ARM incoming. I'm quite sure.
As far as speculation goes for Zen 3, with the move to an 8 core CCX with shared L3$, this seems to obviate the idea of a 4 core 5300X or 5500. I do, however, think that a 3xxxXT might be a good solution for those chips to bring them up to date.
Given the 4xxx APU layouts, I do wonder if Zen 3 APUs are really going to see as much of a benefit, or if they'll essentially be 4xxxXT chips at that point?