Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)

Page 232 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JustViewing

Senior member
Aug 17, 2022
269
473
106
They are different types of devices, with different types of workload. Nobody is using their mobile phone or iPad to execute the type of high throughput MT workloads that some execute on desktop PCs. Hence the higher need for more MT perf on desktop PCs.
Exactly. Moreover, if there is a 32 core processor, then 16 core processor becomes cheaper and accesible to more people. In turn more software will be optimized for higher core count.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fjodor2001

Fjodor2001

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2010
4,208
582
126
That's not the point and I think you know. You say there is stagnation comparable to Intel. In 2018 a tablet launched that was faster in MT than the best non-HEDT part from Intel only 18 months earlier. That's stagnation of MT performance. If AMD is stagnating in MT then the entire industry is stagnating with them :)
I was just pointing out the fact that there is less need for high MT performance on mobile phones and iPads compared to desktop PCs, since you brought up the comparison.

Regarding MT perf stagnation on AMD desktop CPUs, I think it’s quite clear that we’re seeing that. Especially compared to when the first Zen generations entered the market and rapidly bumped core count. Then nothing has happened since 2019 w.r.t. core count increase from AMD.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the tables will turn this time, and it’ll be Intel leading the push for more cores going forward. They are already at 24C and rumors are that it’ll inrease further with their upcoming desktop CPU generations.
 

gdansk

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
4,568
7,681
136
Exactly. Moreover, if there is a 32 core processor, then 16 core processor becomes cheaper and accesible to more people. In turn more software will be optimized for higher core count.
Let me remind you that Zen 2 increased MT but also increased MSRP from $329 for the 2700X to $750 for the 3950X. How much was the 3700X MSRP? How much is the 7700X MSRP? Are AMD 8 core parts cheaper because of the introduction of 16 core parts?
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,884
4,873
136
That’s still a substantial portion, especially if you add sales of both the 16C CPUs (7950X and 7950X3D) together. You said even AMD was surprised how well the 3950X (and I assume 16C later versions) are selling.

Also, note that not everyone has to buy the top end SKU for it to be justified. Those that only want 8C/16C can still buy that even if AMD introduce 24C/32C variants.

24C are not needed for the time, looking at the sales vs core count 8C should still keep being the most relevant for quite some time, here a sample of german weekly sales, you ll understand that a 24C Zen 5 is surely not on AMD s plan :



GDLOqjHW0AAL2xi
 

Fjodor2001

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2010
4,208
582
126
24C are not needed for the time, looking at the sales vs core count 8C should still keep being the most relevannt for quite some time, here a sample of german weekly sales, you ll understand that a 24C Zen 5 is surely not on AMD s plan :



GDLOqjHW0AAL2xi
I don’t see how you can derive any such conclusion from that statistics.

Are you looking at sales of Intel 24C CPUs and trying to draw conclusions from that? In that case I don’t think it’s relevant, because the reason people are buying 8C/16C AMD CPUs instead is simply because the AMD CPUs are better at this point (in several regards). It does not say anything about how potential 24C/32C AMD CPUs would sell.

Fact is still that the AMD CPUs with max current core count of 16C are selling very well, indicating that there is demand for high core count AMD CPUs. The crowd that are buying them would most likely move over to buying 24/32C variants instead if such were available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustViewing

gdansk

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
4,568
7,681
136
Fact is still that the AMD CPUs with max current core count of 16C are selling very well, indicating that there is demand for high core count AMD CPUs. The crowd that are buying them would most likely move over to buying 24/32C variants instead if such were available.
The 7950X and X3D are the highest 1T performance parts too, they sell for more than their core count alone. AMD always likes the two to go together to get that upsell.

Unrelated but how do you reckon the 32C variant would be constructed? Is it 4 CCD? or CCDs are now 16 cores? Or is it 2 x Zen 5C CCDs? What would be the price of such a part?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

Fjodor2001

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2010
4,208
582
126
Let me remind you that Zen 2 increased MT but also increased MSRP from $329 for the 2700X to $750 for the 3950X
The 8C 3800X was $399 and the 12C 3900X was $499 though, so not such a big price difference for that higher core count variant.

Agreed that the 3950X was quite expensive at launch though, compared to the lower core count variants.
 

Fjodor2001

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2010
4,208
582
126
Unrelated but how do you reckon the 32C variant would be constructed? Is it 4 CCD? or CCDs are now 16 cores? Or is it 2 x Zen 5C CCDs? What would be the price of such a part?
Good question. Could also be e.g. 8C Zen5 CCD + 16C Zen5C CCD for 24C variant, or 2 x 8C Zen5 CCD + 16C Zen5C CCD for 32C variant.

W.r.t. price, that’s hard to know. Currently 7950X is around $550. So if 16C Zen5 would be $649, possibly 24C would be $799 and 32C $999. Note that this assumes use of some Zen5C cores for 24C/32C variants as mentioned above. If only Zen5 cores the price would be higher.
 

gdansk

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
4,568
7,681
136
Good question. Could also be e.g. 8C Zen5 CCD + 16C Zen5C CCD for 24C variant, or 2 x 8C Zen5 CCD + 16C Zen5C CCD for 32C variant.

W.r.t. price, that’s hard to know. Currently 7950X is around $550. So if 16C Zen5 would be $649, possibly 24C would be $799 and 32C $999. Note that this assumes use of some Zen5C cores for 24C/32C variants as mentioned above. If only Zen5 cores the price would be higher.
If they can fit 3 CCD why not try 1 x 8C Zen 5 CCD and 2 x 16C Zen 5C CCD. Should be even better for throughput.

In any case I think 1 Zen5 + 1 Zen5C seeems the most plausible as it'd still only be 2 CCDs. How many GMI links does the current IOd have? I can't seem to find this information right now.
 

Timorous

Golden Member
Oct 27, 2008
1,978
3,864
136
If you want more than 16c go with threadripper.

Do you really think 2 channels can properly feed more than 16 cores? We see large uplifts with the 64 core TR going from 4 channel to 8 channel so we know 32c would be limited on just 2.
 

soresu

Diamond Member
Dec 19, 2014
4,101
3,560
136
@DisEnchantment As it seems likely Zen 5 based Strix/Granite Ridge is going to be 9xxx series now with the 8xxx series being a Phoenix Point respin, should the thread title be renamed?
 

Goop_reformed

Senior member
Sep 23, 2023
316
341
96
Zen1->Zen2 in 2019 went from 8C to 16C, roughly doubling the CPU perf. So ~20% increase for Zen4->Zen5 would be nothing in comparison. If we'll see 32C on Zen5 AM5 (or some combination of P + E cores reaching similar MT performance core count) then it would be something similarly impressive. Otherwise, at a substantial price increase to $999 for top SKU, Zen5 will be a reverse osbourne to announce info about at this point.
A rising tide lifts all boats :)
 

gdansk

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
4,568
7,681
136
Or more accurately a rising MSRP lifts MT scores :)
HEDT prices (and performance) have been available on dual-channel sockets since the 3950X. And HEDT power limits have been available to dual-channel sockets since the 12900K/7950X.
 
Last edited:

Tigerick

Senior member
Apr 1, 2022
845
798
106
I can't believe people still arguing whether 16-core is enough in 2024. The real question should be what is required to fit in 32-core in desktop space???

As shown in the thread of future Intel's desktop CPU roadmap below, DDR6 in 2026 is the key enabler for 32-core Zen 6/7. With doubling core counts, so does power requirement, that's why AMD is aggressive to order TSMC's N2 wafer unlike in the past. Based on some leaks, I think below is my speculated AMD's desktop CPU roadmap:

1. Zen5 (N4P x 2): 16-core AM5: Q2 2024
2. Zen6 (N3P x 1): 16-core Venice AM5: 2025
3. Zen7 (N2 x 1): 32-core Venice AM6: Q4 2026

Both Zen6 and 7 will utilize more advanced process with monolithic design. That's one way to reduce power consumption. And unless AMD wants to be late in game, 32-core Zen7 will most likely debut in Q4 2026; same timeline as Intel's Nova Lake. We will see the fight between AMD and Intel again: 32 vs 16P+32E. Too bad the fight won't happen until three years later. Now you all know why adroc say 16-core is enough cause we won't see 32-core CPU until Q4-2026.

PS: Zen7 might not be AMD's first CPU to support DDR6, AMD might have another APU works with LPDDR6 which should debut earlier. That part has no leaks yet, so I let you guys speculate as well ;)


What is with 2 downvotes for stating the obvious date??? Seems like somebody don't really follow Intel's timeline and speculate the date...Of course ARL-S will be launching in Q4 2024. Here's the timeline from Raptor Lake-S onwards:-

1. Raptor Lake-S 13th Gen: Q4 2022
2. Raptor Lake-R 14th Gen: Q4 2023
3. Arrow Lake-S 8+16 (N3B): Q4 2024
4. Arrow Lake-R 8+32 (N3B): Q4 2025
5. Nova Lake-S 16+32 (N2): Q4 2026

Unless some showstopper bugs appear, I think Intel will stick to above timetable. As for Arrow Lake 20A, I think Intel will make it for mobile -H only just like Meteor Lake, this one I am not so sure, it all depends on yield and true PPA of 20A, we shall see...
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

TESKATLIPOKA

Platinum Member
May 1, 2020
2,696
3,260
136
AMD doesn't want to increase core count If It's not needed to be competitive in desktop.
If they increase the core count, then they will cannibalize their sales of lower core count server parts, which are more expensive with better margins.
It's a company, and their goal is to make money, there is no good or bad company, that's just pure BS.

For desktop IPC or frequency is the most important, because It will affect performance as a whole, not just partially as more cores would do.
I can agree that $999 for only a 16core is seriously a lot, which would have a bad perf/price ratio compared to previous generation, but those who want the best will buy It.
For the rest, you can either buy something with less cores or the previous generation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
16,799
7,249
136
I can't believe people still arguing whether 16-core is enough in 2024. The real question should be what is required to fit in 32-core in desktop space???

Would it help gaming much? There's your answer.

Also isn't Zen 5 supposed to be a chonker? That 30% more IPC isn't free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

Tigerick

Senior member
Apr 1, 2022
845
798
106
Would it help gaming much? There's your answer.

Also isn't Zen 5 supposed to be a chonker? That 30% more IPC isn't free.
Ask me the same question three years later cause Apple, AMD, Intel and Qualcomm are all gunning to launch new generation of CPU/APU to utilize the doubling memory bandwidth of DDR6. It is the PC market share that four companies are fighting for; so tell me do you think any company will miss the boat in 2026?

It is the company's business to fight for it, and I believe AMD and Qualcomm will debut their APU before Apple's M5 series.
 

JustViewing

Senior member
Aug 17, 2022
269
473
106
If you want more than 16c go with threadripper.
Platform cost is too much when I only want 32 cores.

Do you really think 2 channels can properly feed more than 16 cores? We see large uplifts with the 64 core TR going from 4 channel to 8 channel so we know 32c would be limited on just 2.
Yes, because we had 2 channel DDR4 for 16 Cores. So naturally, 2 channel DDR5 should be enough for 32 Core Zen5. That doesn't mean it is optimal, but should be enough. In addition, these processors have large L3 so it can mitigate memory limitations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fjodor2001

JustViewing

Senior member
Aug 17, 2022
269
473
106
Not if you use a combination of Performance & Efficiency cores, where the latter are also clocked lower.
Also if the power target is 230W, 32 Zen4 cores can run comfortably within that limit. Even at 125W, 32 core Zen4 is possible without loosing much of single core performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fjodor2001

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
5,155
5,542
136
So apparently the market wanted 16C already in 2019 after all.

Now that was more than 4 years ago, and we’re long overdue for another core count increase.
How do you propose solving the bandwidth/core problem if sticking with a common shared socket?
 

Fjodor2001

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2010
4,208
582
126
How do you propose solving the bandwidth/core problem if sticking with a common shared socket?
You mean memory bandwidth per core? That was already discussed in previous posts. In short, I don’t think it’ll be a problem for most MT workloads.
 
Last edited: