Speculation: Spring refresh for Ryzen

[Vattila]

As I've posted elsewhere, I think AMD fell short of their frequency targets for the Ryzen 3000 series. A later launch than expected, statements relating to frequency challenges, Max Boost redefinition, boost issues, 3900X shortages, and now the 3950X delay from September to November, do all corroborate this. I guess they aimed for 5 GHz, but fell ~8% short.

However, TSMC is firing on all cylinders. Amongst a number of process roadmap announcements, they now offer N7P as a refinement of their N7 process on which the Zen 2 chiplet is built. N7P is compatible with N7 design rules, so it should provide a fairly simple and cost-effective opportunity to optimise existing designs.

With that in mind, is there a chance that AMD will do a spring refresh based on a faster stepping of the CPU chiplet?

 

[maddie]

Geez, glad you weren't around for the Q6600. SLACR anyone?

Always loved that name. A slacker it definitely wasn't.

 

[Hans Gruber]

Always loved that name. A slacker it definitely wasn't.

I have a SLACR Q6600 still in a decommissioned PC in my garage. It ran everyday @ 3.6ghz Those were the days that I left AMD in the past. Always hoping like a phoenix rising from the ashes that AMD would be back to its former glory days.

 

[jpiniero]

AMD Ryzen 3000XT "Matisse Refresh" specs and pricing leaks - VideoCardz.com

AMD Ryzen 3000XT series with the same base clocks as “X” variants AMD is set to introduce Matisse Refresh processors later this week. The new SKUs are slightly overclocked variants that’s will replace the current “X” models at the same price. Thus, the official MSRP for the older models will be...

videocardz.com

Videocardz claims the official MSRP will be $499 for the 3900XT, $399 for the 3800XT, and $249 for the 3600XT.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Makes sense, since those were the release prices for 3900x, 3800x, and 3600x. Sadly that may mean higher prices for Vermeer. The max boost clocks don't seem that much higher. It'll be interesting to see all-core clocks (which, mind you, will vary based on workload).

 

[DisEnchantment]

Press Releases

Browse AMD’s company-wide and financial press releases.

ir.amd.com

From the horse's mouth

The AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT offers:

• Up to 4% increase in single-threaded performance over AMD Ryzen 3000 desktop processors3
• Up to 40% more power efficiency than the competition4

 

[jpiniero]

Interesting that the PR doesn't mention anything about higher all core boosts.

 

[Zucker2k]

Interesting that the PR doesn't mention anything about higher all core boosts.

Good catch! Nobody wants a lawsuit on their hands would be the smart guess.

Edit:

So, this is essentially a little bit more single-thread performance for a little bit more cash. With a max of 4.7GHz, the 3900x 3900xt inherits the single-thread performance of the 3950x. What this says, for now, is that 4.7GHz is the ceiling for TSMC's 7nm. It's not clear if this is N7P as some members were suggesting earlier.
Also, if AMD is going to go to this length to monetize a 100MHz/200MHz single core boost, does this have any bearing on when Zen 3 will release?

 

[coercitiv]

Good catch! Nobody wants a lawsuit on their hands would be the smart guess.

I doubt it makes any difference though, after all what matter the most in consumer desktop chips is ST performance, right?

 

[moinmoin]

Interesting that the PR doesn't mention anything about higher all core boosts.

To achieve a higher frequency across all cores at the same time would either require an improvement in efficiency or different limits compared to the direct precursors.

 

[Zucker2k]

I doubt it makes any difference though, after all what matter the most in consumer desktop chips is ST performance, right?

Most definitely! Watch the video above. The higher you can push individual cores, the better still.

 

[jpiniero]

To achieve a higher frequency across all cores at the same time would either require an improvement in efficiency or different limits compared to the direct precursors.

I was thinking they would pull an Intel and let the power limit go well above 140 W.

 

[CHADBOGA]

What is the core limit within a CCX for Zen 2?

Will any of these XT models have all the cores on one CCX and thus give the sorts of latency and performance improvements that we saw with the 3300x?

 

[Zucker2k]

I was thinking they would pull an Intel and let the power limit go well above 140 W.

If more power could've helped, I'm pretty sure they would've. AMD pretty maxed the N7 process in every way. Case in point, tagging 100MHz on the 3900x refresh boost clock.

 

[coercitiv]

I was thinking they would pull an Intel and let the power limit go well above 140 W.

They may still do something of the sort, since Anandtech reports that AMD ‘is recommending the use of an AIO solution with a minimum 280mm radiator or equivalent air cooling to experience these products at their best’.

Unless these SKUs have some XTra OC headroom in them it's going to be an XTremely boring refresh.

 

[maddie]

They may still do something of the sort, since Anandtech reports that AMD ‘is recommending the use of an AIO solution with a minimum 280mm radiator or equivalent air cooling to experience these products at their best’.

Unless these SKUs have some XTra OC headroom in them it's going to be an XTremely boring refresh.

First time buyers.

 

[Atari2600]

The AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT offers:

• Up to 4% increase in single-threaded performance over AMD Ryzen 3000 desktop processors3

Forget about the competition quote (as the current CPUs probably offer 36% better power efficiency than them).


Is 4% ST really worth all this? Why not just quietly push the new stepping into the wild, tell the reviewers and be done with it. No renames, no new tiers, no new price points.

Don't like this - too much like an Intel move.


Although, I suppose against that, Intel have been releasing 3-4% steps since Skylake.

 

[Hitman928]

Forget about the competition quote (as the current CPUs probably offer 36% better power efficiency than them).


Is 4% ST really worth all this? Why not just quietly push the new stepping into the wild, tell the reviewers and be done with it. No renames, no new tiers, no new price points.

Don't like this - too much like an Intel move.


Although, I suppose against that, Intel have been releasing 3-4% steps since Skylake.

The reasons to do this I think are two fold. First is that it forces reviewers who want to test the chip to get fresh data on the 'XT' variants. Some (probably most) reviewers test chips at launch and then just hold onto that data for comparison against future chip releases. So when a new chip comes out 6 months or a year later (or more), they are comparing the new chip with fresh data after any potential OS/app updates/patches against the older chip without the updates. It's not really good testing practice but due to time/money constraints I think it's more the norm than the exception. If the reports about the latest silicon being higher clockers in general is true as well, then the overclocking section of reviews should show a noticeable improvement over the launch day reviews as well.

Second is just marketing. After the latest Intel launch, AMD wants to make sure their name remains in people's minds. A refresh, no matter how minor, does that. As long as they don't do something stupid with the pricing of the refresh, I don't see any downside.

 

[coercitiv]

Don't like this - too much like an Intel move.

They're doing it for the news cycle really. Both XT branding and B550 will simply push more of the same 3600 and 3700X in the consumer's hands. Rinse and repeat with 4000G series and AMD comfortably rides the news cycles until Zen 3.

 

[Panino Manino]

Underwhelming.
Looks like AMD just wants to keep moments and discussions going.

 

[moinmoin]

Don't like this - too much like an Intel move.

Maybe it's an elaborated troll to make a point?

"Intel has mainly been doing refreshes since 5 years, and press and people still talk about it favorably even today. We can do Intel-style refreshes as well! *presents Ryzen 3000 XT*"
...a couple months later...
"Now for something actually new. *presents Vermeer based products*"

 

[amrnuke]

3600XT has 2.2% faster clocks than 3600X
3800XT has 4.4% faster clocks than 3800X
3900XT has 2.2% faster clocks than 3900X

Adding 4.4% ST performance to a 3700X, for example, would make it equal to a 10900K at stock in 1440p gaming. That's not an insignificant thing if the 3800XT can equal a 10900K at 1440p gaming... because the 3800XT is over $100 cheaper with a cheaper ecosystem to boot.

 

[blckgrffn]

Well, it makes the 3800x/xt SKU spot more relevant than it was previously?

One of the previous reasons to get the 3800 was to get maybe some extra headroom, and now you are getting it for sure.

Are we just assuming the "x" variants are going away at this time? Or will we really get these new SKUs AND the old ones for the forseeable future? Sorry if this was addressed, I must have missed it if mentioned in the Anandtech article.

 

[french toast]

I think this is more about marketing than anything else, keeping Ryzen fresh in the minds of consumers as the 'newest' desktop cpu's.. Also as others have stated it forces re runs of the benchmarks showing Ryzen is the best all round choice.
Intel's gaming and ST lead is going to be minimal.

 

[jpiniero]

Are we just assuming the "x" variants are going away at this time? Or will we really get these new SKUs AND the old ones for the forseeable future? Sorry if this was addressed, I must have missed it if mentioned in the Anandtech article.

No mention of models being discontinued.

 

[Zucker2k]

Well, it makes the 3800x/xt SKU spot more relevant than it was previously?

It essentially forces people with $400 to spend on a cpu to either choose a 3900x or the 3800x. So, basically, 4 more cores, or 100MHz.