Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)

[Vattila]

Except for the details about the improvements in the microarchitecture, we now know pretty well what to expect with Zen 3.

The leaked presentation by AMD Senior Manager Martin Hilgeman shows that EPYC 3 "Milan" will, as promised and expected, reuse the current platform (SP3), and the system architecture and packaging looks to be the same, with the same 9-die chiplet design and the same maximum core and thread-count (no SMT-4, contrary to rumour). The biggest change revealed so far is the enlargement of the compute complex from 4 cores to 8 cores, all sharing a larger L3 cache ("32+ MB", likely to double to 64 MB, I think).

Hilgeman's slides did also show that EPYC 4 "Genoa" is in the definition phase (or was at the time of the presentation in September, at least), and will come with a new platform (SP5), with new memory support (likely DDR5).

What else do you think we will see with Zen 4? PCI-Express 5 support? Increased core-count? 4-way SMT? New packaging (interposer, 2.5D, 3D)? Integrated memory on package (HBM)?

Vote in the poll and share your thoughts!

 

[Markfw]

Do you suppose we could talk about what the thread is about ? COMPUTERS ! Zen 4 in specific ???????

 

[repoman0]

Wasn't an issue last generation

This is trolling at this point. Last generation I could set my cooler to 100% and my 5900X would boost to ~4.1-4.2GHz in Prime95 all cores loaded. My 7900X at 70% fan speed boosts above 5GHz.

It’s a non-issue.

 

[gdansk]

This is trolling at this point. Last generation I could set my cooler to 100% and my 5900X would boost to ~4.1-4.2GHz in Prime95 all cores loaded. My 7900X at 70% fan speed boosts above 5GHz.

It’s a non-issue.

It's an issue and people defending it are wrong. At 100% my 7950X boosts above 5GHz but it's still a set back for reasonable cooling solutions everywhere.

The default power limit should have been 125W/170W instead of 170W/230W. But AMD shipped them like this for the 5% gain in benchmarks. Absurd, stupid and Intel-like focus on benchmarks rather than real world balance that "Zen" was all about until now.

 

[repoman0]

It's an issue and people defending it are wrong. At 100% my 7950X boosts above 5GHz but it's still a set back for reasonable cooling solutions everywhere.

The default power limit should have been 125W/170W instead of 170W/230W. But AMD shipped them like this for the 5% gain in benchmarks. Absurd, stupid and Intel-like.

I have a secret for you: you can turn the power down too!

 

[gdansk]

I have a secret for you: you can turn the power down too!

Yes, you can throttle the chip. But guess what? The defaults remain inefficient like Intel's MCE. It's a big step back for efficiency.

And I'd like to remind @Markfw you thought it was 170W power limit for their benchmarks. It was 230W and now you're defending it.

 

[igor_kavinski]

If Cortana could be customized, AMD could push out a profile for Zen 3/4 PCs, where Cortana would greet the user like so: "Hello! I see that you are running your CPU at full power. Would you like me to show you how to use Ryzen Master to run your CPU in ECO mode? You will benefit from the perfect balance of speed and power usage".

 

[Markfw]

Yes, you can throttle the chip. But guess what? The defaults remain inefficient like Intel's MCE. It's a big step back for efficiency.

And I'd like to remind @Markfw you thought it was 170W power limit for their benchmarks. It was 230W and now you're defending it.

I said it did not make sense. Until it came out and was official, then I had to accept it. I still think it should be more power limited, but it is what it is, and it still takes less than alderlake for more performance.

 

[Atari2600]

It's an issue and people defending it are wrong. At 100% my 7950X boosts above 5GHz but it's still a set back for reasonable cooling solutions everywhere.

Err, no. Its not an issue - those that think its an issue must be intellectually challenged.

If your fans are too loud - adjust your fan profile so that the CPU throttles back.

If your power consumption/heat load is too much, adjust the max power consumption in bios to pull load back.

Both will reduce clock speeds a bit - but performance is still a massively better than the competition* its whatever the USER CHOOSES to do.

User choice - you can choose to avail of the flexibilty AMD has given you - or you can choose to be an idiot.

*given similar thermal/power constraints

 

[gdansk]

Err, no. Its not an issue - those that think its an issue must be intellectually challenged.

If your fans are too loud - adjust your fan profile so that the CPU throttles back.

If your power consumption/heat load is too much, adjust the max power consumption in bios to pull load back.

Both will reduce clock speeds a bit - but performance is still a massively better than the competition* its whatever the USER CHOOSES to do.

User choice - you can choose to avail of the flexibility AMD has given you - or you can choose to be an idiot.

*given similar thermal/power constraints

I have set my fans the correct way (set a thermal target). Now I am not entitled to complain about AMD's idiotic MCE like defaults because "user choice" is available. It should have been 170W power limit. And the "user choice" should be the ability to set a 230W PPT. I will not stop complaining about AMD's unreasonable defaults because people think it's idiotic or trolling to do so. It's a simple fact. AMD reversed 5 years of reasonable defaults to be 5% faster on a meaningless benchmark.

You can test it yourself on your 7950X. The last 60W do almost nothing. But it is just enough, probably, to eek out the 13900K on MT.

 

[Markfw]

I have set my fans the correct way (set a thermal target). Now I am not entitled to complain about AMD's idiotic MCE like defaults because "user choice" is available. It should have been 170W power limit. And the "user choice" should be the ability to set a 230W PPT. I will not stop complaining about AMD's unreasonable defaults because people think it's idiotic or trolling to do so. It's a simple fact. AMD reversed 5 years of reasonable defaults to be 5% faster on a meaningless benchmark.

You can test it yourself on your 7950X. The last 60W do almost nothing. But it is just enough, probably, to eek out the 13900K on MT.

If you don't want to use your "user choice" and set the ppt to 170, why are you still complaining ?

 

[Exist50]

If you don't want to use your "user choice" and set the ppt to 170, why are you still complaining ?

Pardon, didn't you yourself condemn Alder Lake based on that exact same criteria?

 

[gdansk]

If you don't want to use your "user choice" and set the ppt to 170, why are you still complaining ?

Because it should be the opposite. 170W out of the box. User choice to set it to 230W. It's bad defaults because they know that's what people see in reviews. Intel-like behavior but now from AMD too

 

[blackangus]

Why is it idiotic to default to a power profile that will likely make your product best its competition at a lower power level and higher performance while allowing the customer to tune power consumption to what they would like if they don't like the default?
Seems reasonable to me.
This is what competition does. Most people will never mess with anything other than defaults, so to make yourself look lesser than your competitor for any reason isn't really acceptable. When the market clearly shows they stop buying CPU's with higher power use is when this will change, and not until then.

 

[Markfw]

Pardon, didn't you yourself condemn Alder Lake based on that exact same criteria?

Intel did that on Alder lake because they HAD to to beat Zen 3. AMD still uses less than Intel, and even with it lowered can beat Alderlake and probably even Raptor Lake.

The fact that it is as high as it is does not make me happy, but being able to beat the competition and have lower power AND being able to lower it further does help.

 

[Exist50]

Intel did that on Alder lake because they HAD to to beat Zen 3.

That never factored into your "explanation" before, and clearly AMD thinks these power limits are helpful for something...

 

[In2Photos]

Good grief, people complaining that you have to turn down performance. I guess you leave XMP/EXPO off then? Yeah I didn't think so. You have to go into the BIOS to enable that so how hard is it to also turn on ECO mode while you're in there?

 

[Markfw]

That never factored into your "explanation" before, and clearly AMD thinks these power limits are helpful for something...

Not that I am saying this is true (until Raptor lake reviews come out) But it appears that Raptor lake MAY have to use up to 350 watts to beat Zen 4 at 230 watts. You never commented on my post that had real facts about how 8 P-cores at full power still cannot beat 8 Zen 4 cores and Zen 4 can use less power. BOTH USING AVX-512 ! And Raptor lake will not have AVX-512. So before all the log files go away, look at them or NEVER doubt me ever again.

 

[gdansk]

Good grief, people complaining that you have to turn down performance. I guess you leave XMP/EXPO off then? Yeah I didn't think so. You have to go into the BIOS to enable that so how hard is it to also turn on ECO mode while you're in there?

Not that XMP/EXPO are perfect examples but they operate the way I want. Which sounds like the opposite of what you want. Of course, you have to wonder why AMD didn't want it the XMP/EXPO way...

 

[Exist50]

You never commented on my post that had real facts about how 8 P-cores at full power still cannot beat 8 Zen 4 cores and Zen 4 can use less power.

Ok, and? That wasn't the comments I was responding to. You've continually insisted that you fundamentally hate Alder Lake's high power consumption, heat, etc solely for existing. You've claimed to find >200W power consumption simply unconscionable. Now here you are defending the exact same thing from AMD. I don't care what your actual position is on high TDPs, but at least have one instead of using it as a disguise for brand favoritism.

OTH USING AVX-512 ! And Raptor lake will not have AVX-512. So before all the log files go away, look at them or NEVER doubt me ever again.

You used to insist that Zen 3 was >4x as efficient as Golden Cove. You insisted Zen 4 would be 2x efficient as Raptor Lake a single day before AMD themselves marketed 1.47x vs Alder Lake. So tell me what logs I'm supposed to look at to validate those claims? Because you certainly don't have them here.

 

[Markfw]

Ok, and? That wasn't the comments I was responding to. You've continually insisted that you fundamentally hate Alder Lake's high power consumption, heat, etc solely for existing. Now here you are defending the exact same thing from AMD.


You used to insist that Zen 3 was >4x as efficient as Golden Cove. You insisted Zen 4 would be 2x efficient as Raptor Lake a single day before AMD themselves marketed 1.47x vs Alder Lake. So tell me what logs I'm supposed to look at to validate those claims?

You just keep shifiting goal posts. The thread I was referring to was about performance. I have even admitted that I gave up on my thoughts on power consumption, even though they are more efficient, just as not as much as I anticipated.

Bottom line : I predict Zen 4 will win most performance benchmarks, while using less power than Raptor Lake.

 

[Exist50]

You just keep shifiting goal posts.

I quoted your very words in this thread. Or are you going to claim to have never criticized Alder Lake solely for high power consumption?

I have even admitted that I gave up on my thoughts on power consumption, even though they are more efficient, just as not as much as I anticipated.

In literally your last comment, you ranted about me questioning those very claims.

 

[Atari2600]

I have set my fans the correct way (set a thermal target).

You have set your fans the old fashioned way and are complaining the world has moved on.

 

[gdansk]

You have set your fans the old fashioned way and are complaining the world has moved on.

No, if I limit my fans to 70% at maximum I get worse benchmark results. I have verified this.
Setting the thermal target to 80C - which is mapped to 70% fan speed - I somehow gets better results and lower temperatures.
Again, feel free to test it yourself. I suspect it's because it is going over 70% fan speed briefly but the Max RPM recorded seems about the same.

 

[nicalandia]

Seems like MSI is allowing to disable AVX512 With new BIOS ...

 

[In2Photos]

Not that XMP/EXPO are perfect examples but they operate the way I want. Which sounds like the opposite of what you want. Of course, you have to wonder why AMD didn't want it the XMP/EXPO way...

Ah, so it's wrong because it's not what you want? Got it! How dare AMD!