• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Speculation: Ryzen 4000 series/Zen 3

Page 215 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

moinmoin

Platinum Member
Jun 1, 2017
2,079
2,495
106
Is it because of the process or the design?
Probably both, the process doesn't improve power usage sufficiently and may have a worse frequency/power curve, while the design clearly is not optimized for that node. AMD warned before that getting high frequencies is harder on smaller nodes. N7 seems to handle it well, N5 may take more time to reach a similar level.

Hm, looking around for similar CPU/RAM frequencies memory read is essentially the same as Zen 2, latency down ~5ns. L1 and L2 cache bandwidths are hugely improved, look like nearly 3 times that of Zen 2 which points to Zen 3 cores having its Load/Store redesigned to match (and surpass?) what Intel was offering all along. L3 cache bandwidth seems that of a single chiplet Zen 2 chip, but improved between ~6% (read) and ~26% (write).
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
7,249
1,839
136
L1 and L2 cache bandwidths are hugely improved, look like nearly 3 times that of Zen 2 which points to Zen 3 cores having its Load/Store redesigned to match (and surpass?) what Intel was offering all along. L3 cache bandwidth seems that of a single chiplet Zen 2 chip, but improved between ~6% (read) and ~26% (write).
Not according to that screenshot. The throughput is exactly the same as Ryzen 3000 series and also Skylake.

Icelake is higher, and the highest is Skylake-SP.
 

moinmoin

Platinum Member
Jun 1, 2017
2,079
2,495
106
Not according to that screenshot. The throughput is exactly the same as Ryzen 3000 series and also Skylake.

Icelake is higher, and the highest is Skylake-SP.
Maybe we are looking at different screeshots. I was comparing the tweeted screenshot mainly with this one shared on TPU's forums, matching memory clock (though better subtimings):
 

Tuna-Fish

Golden Member
Mar 4, 2011
1,049
627
136
Wow, L3 bandwidth got cut in half, i guess that explains lack of MT scaling in benchmarks. Not exactly unexpected due to move from 2 to 1 L3 domain and end result is that 8C can access ~same L3 BW as Intel Skylake 8-10C ring.
Wow, there are probably only 4 L3 slices per chiplet. If they are all still 32B/cycle, that would explain the total throughput. Would simplify the routing, and reduce the amount of links needed...
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,114
2,056
136
Is this legit? That performance jump seems insane! I can take my current CPU and jump 4 generations, and barely see an increase of a few points/percent. Yet Ryzen 5000 is supposedly ~20-30% greater then just a gen earlier?!
It's possible especially in some select benchmarks. ST IPC is ~19% better on average vs Zen2, that is massive jump and what we could call a true gen to gen leap.

Regarding the MT performance and the reasons why it might not reflect the full 19% (in some cases), it doesn't really matter. AMD has such a massive MT (throughput) advantage over intel that it's not even funny anymore. The only benchmarks in which intel has some advantage will be AVX512 and that is like 1% of the workloads (if that).
Zen3's competition in MT workloads is Zen2 which is considerably slower - so all is good.

AMD now has a better chip in every segment, with higher IPC (Zen3) cores and higher core counts. Zen4 can just get the MT throughput to another level, with more cache, more chiplets and even more IPC. Intel will need Golden Cove cores with the same core count and same clock speeds to even stay on the same level as Zen4 cores and we know this will not happen as per their latest roadmaps. So relax, MT performance is great as it is and ST is the best in class. AMD is in a great place and I hope they keep their foot on the gas.
 

DisEnchantment

Senior member
Mar 3, 2017
700
1,626
106
Probably both, the process doesn't improve power usage sufficiently and may have a worse frequency/power curve, while the design clearly is not optimized for that node. AMD warned before that getting high frequencies is harder on smaller nodes. N7 seems to handle it well, N5 may take more time to reach a similar level.
Not only this, also the scaling is not ideal, logic, SRAM, SerDes, Analog blocks etc scale differently. And a CPU is not all logic.
I am still hopeful of Samsung GAA to bring back some of the gains like we saw when moving to FinFET.
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
7,249
1,839
136
3600 chip is 6 core, 1500/6*16 => 4000GB/s for 16C
This.

L1 Write
2266GB/s for 5950X
766GB/s for 3600

L2 Read/Write/Copy
~2080GB/s for 5950X
720-760GB/s for 3600

5950X: 4.94GHz with 16 cores
3600: 4.167GHz with 6 cores

Clock and core normalized bandwidth

L1 Write
2266GB/s for 5950X
2421GB/s for 3600

L2 Read/Write/Copy
~2080GB/s for 5950X
2276-2402GB/s for 3600

It hasn't improved one iota for Zen 3.
 

moinmoin

Platinum Member
Jun 1, 2017
2,079
2,495
106
3600 chip is 6 core, 1500/6*16 => 4000GB/s for 16C
Thanks for the correction. Somehow I was thinking L1 and L2 cache bandwidth would be given as per core, not as a sum across all cores which is frankly nonsensical... ah well.
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
5,982
797
126
^^ LOL! When I said it doesn't have an IMC, I meant in terms of how it compares to Intel's IMC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Intel's IMC is located on the same die as the CPU cores in a monolithic design (which is why they have such low latencies), whereas with AMD's chiplet design, the memory controller is on a separate 12nm I/O die located on the same piece of silicon, connected by infinity fabric connection.

So technically, AMD is using an IMC, but not in the same manner as Intel.
 

cortexa99

Member
Jul 2, 2018
113
158
86
I don't know if it has been posted before:



2Cinebench R20 (higher is better)Cinebench R15 (higher is better)CPU-Z (higher is better)Passmark Single Threaded (higher is better)Passmark PerfTestv10 (Higher is better)
3Multi coreSingle CoreMulti coreSingle CoreSingle ThreadMulti ThreadsR5 5600x3487CPU markInteger MathFloating Point MathSSEEncryptionSortingCross-platform
4R5 5600x4117600R5 5600x1780253R5 5600x642.7R5 3600x2677R5 5600x22403775964089016293160072759643596
5R5 3600x3751501R5 3600x1647204R5 3600x505i5 10600k2926R5 3600x18318
6i5 10600k3629501i5 10600k1615215i5 10600k551i5 10900k3177i5 10600k14594
7i5 10900k6399539i5 10900k2677234i5 10900k584R9 3950x2747i5 10900k24283
8R9 3950x9148531R9 3950x3897217R9 3950x524R9 3950x39281
9
10
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY