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!

 

[moinmoin]

Maybe AMD is doing this by keeping longevity in mind. If the power budget allocation is imposed early on, they can use the same power budget in later CPUs with higher core count, and there won't be much of power constraints on the hypothetical 24/32 core zen 5 parts they will release on the AM5 platform

With AM4 boards it was a nice surprise to have even cheap old weak-ish boards being able to handle 16 cores with rather little throttling at stock. But AM5 will cover budget products as well over time replacing AM4, and there you'll have 65W TDP or less chips. Those won't need to be prepared for 230W and more PPT, and still enforcing that as suggested is a waste of overhead resources.

 

[leoneazzurro]

Having to be able to handle 230W PPT no matter what is in the guidelines, you sure? If so AM5 suddenly got a lot less enticing. Why should I get such an overbuild board if I plan to use it only at let's say 88W PPT.

Because product segmentation in that regard may add to costs for the MB makers instead of reducing them? What you are suggesting is further segmenting of the market according to the PPT of the CPUs, that is, some CPUs may be not supported at the maximum performance on some mainboards. This adds costs for design and logistics. And just imagine the headache for the producer, even if they put a sticker on the board telling the potential customer what they are really buying and later being filled with returns because the customer thought to have bought something else. Also, the producer does not know how the users want to use these boards, and if they want to be free to purchase later more powerful/power hungry CPUs. In short, while the market for "low power" boards may exist, it is unlikely it is big, and that's worth spending money in addressing it.

 

[Abwx]

man you ppl go on and on about 95 like its something......

I had a X800 all in wonder , modded with X800 XT PE bios that ran at 117c full load for like 6 years.......

some people just like to create drama.

Ex;pect those temps debates to disappear once RPL reviews land, so far there s not a single site that point the 12900/12900K higher temps than Zen 4...

 

[igor_kavinski]

The most annoying part for me about Ryzen 7000/X670E/AM5 are the long POST times, I get boot code 15 for almost 18 seconds before OS starts to load.

Are you dual booting between Windows/Linux? I rarely have to reboot my desktop PC because I just put it to sleep. It might be days or weeks before the system has to reboot. Also, have you tried manual timings on the XMP kit? That might stop the BIOS from training the RAM.

 

[igor_kavinski]

I had a X800 all in wonder , modded with X800 XT PE bios that ran at 117c full load for like 6 years.......

Did it die peacefully? Or spectacularly? Or you just retired it?

 

[MadRat]

Why are we upset AMD uncorked power limitations?

 

[itsmydamnation]

Did it die peacefully? Or spectacularly? Or you just retired it?

retired , it was in a barton 2500 XP machine
got replaced with a x58 920 with 4870 which is just about goat setup of all time
but i remember both the ddr3 ( 3x 2gb dimm) and the MB cost more then the CPU.

 

[Hans Gruber]

retired , it was in a barton 2500 XP machine
got replaced with a x58 920 with 4870 which is just about goat setup of all time
but i remember both the ddr3 ( 3x 2gb dimm) and the MB cost more then the CPU.

My first build was an AMD Atlon 1800+. I later upgraded to a Barton 2500+. I had DDR400 2-2-2 memory. An Abit motherboard with a ATI 9700pro later a 9800pro. My machine with the Barton 2500+ could smoke anything Intel had at the time.

 

[Timmah!]

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X Cooling Requirements & Thermal Throttling

High temperature seem to be an issue on the new Ryzen 7000 processors. We're pairing a Ryzen 9 7950X with a $10 stock cooler, a Noctua air-cooler and a 420 mm AIO to get a feel for what the differences are like in terms of °C, MHz and performance in both applications and games.

www.techpowerup.com

Does not matter what you uses as a cooler, stock remains at 95C! I would go with the $10 air cooler by AMD!

Interesting piece of info.

I was thinking 420 AIO as well, but this leads to question, whether not better to ditch it in favor of that Noctua, and get 2x watercooled 4090s instead of those massive air-cooled ones.

 

[moinmoin]

Because product segmentation in that regard may add to costs for the MB makers instead of reducing them? What you are suggesting is further segmenting of the market according to the PPT of the CPUs, that is, some CPUs may be not supported at the maximum performance on some mainboards. This adds costs for design and logistics. And just imagine the headache for the producer, even if they put a sticker on the board telling the potential customer what they are really buying and later being filled with returns because the customer thought to have bought something else. Also, the producer does not know how the users want to use these boards, and if they want to be free to purchase later more powerful/power hungry CPUs. In short, while the market for "low power" boards may exist, it is unlikely it is big, and that's worth spending money in addressing it.

May well be the case, I just can't imagine that adding nearly twice the headroom (65W -> 170W TDP) doesn't amount to significant additional cost for board makers. And while that headroom is certainly great to have for hypothetical future 24 or even 32 cores chips, it's not like the current 170W TDP chips are anywhere unusable at 65W TDP as ECO mode is showing.

I guess we will see. I fully expect to see cheaper boards to appear, even if only as OEM parts. Can't imagine AMD has a serious interest in preventing that from happening.

 

[leoneazzurro]

May well be the case, I just can't imagine that adding nearly twice the headroom (65W -> 170W TDP) doesn't amount to significant additional cost for board makers. And while that headroom is certainly great to have for hypothetical future 24 or even 32 cores chips, it's not like the current 170W TDP chips are anywhere unusable at 65W TDP as ECO mode is showing.

I guess we will see. I fully expect to see cheaper boards to appear, even if only as OEM parts. Can't imagine AMD has a serious interest in preventing that from happening.

If you look at the pure cost of the BOM, there would be not a big issue. But overall costs are a different matter, as you should add logistics and planning costs, and cost of opportunity. And the issue with not being future proof could have its consequences. Mind me, I appreciate the use of lower power chips, as I have a "notebook" with a desktop 3700X , and it could run also the 3950X in Eco mode. The newer version could run up to the 5950X@65W, and even if they are somewhat limited compared to a full power desktop, I greatly appreciate the performance in that form factor. But, it is a niche market. Few MB makers, if any, would do it in a DIY mainboard.

 

[In2Photos]

Now that the 4090 is out I think we need to see gaming benchmarks redone on the new CPUs. I seem to recall that there were several titles that were GPU bound at the time.

 

[Kaluan]

Now that the 4090 is out I think we need to see gaming benchmarks redone on the new CPUs. I seem to recall that there were several titles that were GPU bound at the time.

I'd rather we wait for RDNA3 and Raptor Lake as well. Might as well.
From the other way around, for GPU benching, I think 7000X3D would be great, but since we don't have a clear launch window, I'd let that slide for now. But it would give drivers and microcode time to mature as well, launch day reviews can only say so much (which is why I hate when people still quote them 2 years on).

 

[Panino Manino]

No more Zen CPUs for the (Microsoft) Surface line.

 

[moinmoin]

No more Zen CPUs for the (Microsoft) Surface line.

It's like Surface just exists to please Intel while Microsoft concurrently works closely with AMD in server (Azure usually getting new Epyc gens first), gaming (Xbox consoles and streaming) and clients (dreaded Pluton black box everywhere).

 

[LightningZ71]

Intel is likely providing an arm-load of cash to MS in the form of integration of their EVO platform intellectual property to make the surface what it is. With the platform integration advantages that gives them, it likely makes it cost prohibitive to develop an AMD solution on their own for this generation as it won't likely be good enough to increase their overall volume sufficiently to cover the R&D costs.

I suspect that we might see a Phoenix based surface at some point for GPU performance reasons.

 

[Harry_Wild]

Custom boards made for all-in-ones/SFF PC, sure.
General purpose publicly available mainboards for DIY builds? No chance, they have to comply with AMD's guidelines.

There are some 7000 series ITX motherboards already in the market!

 

[Harry_Wild]

Going to use only 65 watts on my future 7050X!

 

[leoneazzurro]

There are some 7000 series ITX motherboards already in the market!

Yeah but every single one of them supports the full 170W TDP/230WPPT setting. The question was not about the existence of SFF mainboards, but having MB not supporting the full power requirements for AM5 CPUs.

 

[Harry_Wild]

Yeah but every single one of them supports the full 170W TDP/230WPPT setting. The question was not about the existence of SFF mainboards, but having MB not supporting the full power requirements for AM5 CPUs.

AMD said you can lower the MB wattage using the Ryzen Master Utility! Just do a Google search and tons of articles on this! That why I interest in buy the 7950X myself!

 

[leoneazzurro]

AMD said you can lower the MB wattage using the Ryzen Master Utility! Just do a Google search and tons of articles on this! That why I interest in buy the 7950X myself!

Of course. And I know this. My response was to another user who thought about the possibility of explicitely creating "lower power" boards for cutting the mainboard costs .

 

[poke01]

I suspect that we might see a Phoenix based surface at some point for GPU performance reasons.

MTL and Arrow Lake will have huge iGPUs as well

 

[MadRat]

Maybe M$ could use AI to locate their power hungry software bugs and try to help everyone out. Doesn't matter which CPU you use to run 99% junk cycles.

 

[Kepler_L2]

MTL and Arrow Lake will have huge iGPUs as well

Meteor Lake is far from a "huge" iGPU. It will be lucky to match Rembrandt performance.

 

[jpiniero]

Zen 4 might legitimately be selling really poorly. Top 10 best sellers on Newegg is dominated by Zen 3 with some smattering of Alder Lake.