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

Page 651 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jul 27, 2020
27,953
19,100
146
Regarding scaling better with additional power, granted , it scales where zen4 stopped to scale. The scaling is still rather insignificant, its not like gain additional 50 percent of perf going from 160W to 230. Its maybe 10~15 percent and while thats more than almost nothing before, its still not something extremely impressive, that would take zen5 out of sight of Zen4/RPL perf-wise. And thats really the most important thing imo.
It's just AMD being cautious and not trying to bite off more than they can chew. The X3D is supposed to be the special SKU of this generation. The competition by the end of the year will be super interesting to watch and unless Intel manages some miracle, this will be AMD's year.
 

CouncilorIrissa

Senior member
Jul 28, 2023
722
2,675
106
Finally the GB6 run with Strix boosting properly and it breaks the 2.9k score for the first time.
"frequencies": [
5137,
5137,
5135,
5136,
4914,
4939,
5137,
5135,
5137,
5135,
5137,
5138,
5135,
5138,
5137,
5137,
5136,
5135,
5137,
5134,
5137,
5138,
5135,
5132,
5135,
5137,
5138,
5136,
5134,
5138,
5137,
5138,
5137,
5136,
5099,
5138,
5137,
5136,
5136,
5137,
5138,
5137,
5138,
4966,
5138,
5138,
5136,
5137,
5137,
5136,
5136,
5137
]
 

StefanR5R

Elite Member
Dec 10, 2016
6,667
10,545
136
IMO the one reason why the CCDs are the same size as Zen4 and only transistor count increase comes from the newer denser process, is cause AMD dont thinks they can sell more expensive than Z4 and wont be giving any additional performance increase for “free” - as in potentially bigger CCDs could have been even faster, but AMD would expect to be paid for every additional mm2, and people would not be willing to pay….

Or i am completely wrong and its the same size cause any bigger would not fit under IHS :)
Yes, you are completely wrong ;-) and it is precisely because bigger CCDs would not fit under the IHS. And by that I refer to 1 sIOD + up to 16 CCDs having to fit under Turin's IHS. Granite Ridge's IHS would certainly have room for a little bigger CCDs still. (Although maybe Granite Ridge and Turin might receive CCDs at differing steppings, I presume that the design is the same, just like it was shared between desktop and server in Zen1...Zen4.)

BTW, it has been speculated here that the density increase of Granite Ridge's CCD vs. Raphael's is not only thanks to the process bump, but also due to denser L3$ by means of tweaks which are not yet clear.
 

Tup3x

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2016
1,272
1,405
136
Finally the GB6 run with Strix boosting properly and it breaks the 2.9k score for the first time.
"frequencies": [
5137,
5137,
5135,
5136,
4914,
4939,
5137,
5135,
5137,
5135,
5137,
5138,
5135,
5138,
5137,
5137,
5136,
5135,
5137,
5134,
5137,
5138,
5135,
5132,
5135,
5137,
5138,
5136,
5134,
5138,
5137,
5138,
5137,
5136,
5099,
5138,
5137,
5136,
5136,
5137,
5138,
5137,
5138,
4966,
5138,
5138,
5136,
5137,
5137,
5136,
5136,
5137
]
Probably high performance mode. That laptop also has high TDP so your typical business laptop is not going to be anywhere close.
EDIT: Well, power plan was indeed set to performance.
 

Philste

Senior member
Oct 13, 2023
299
474
96
Finally the GB6 run with Strix boosting properly and it breaks the 2.9k score for the first time.
This should be the final score. David Huang got exactly 3k for the 5.0GHz SKU at Linux. Linux typically has 5% advantage, so it adds up exactly. Also the newest Lunar Lake result has basically exactly the same per clock performance.
 
Last edited:

gaav87

Senior member
Apr 27, 2024
659
1,279
96
I don't see any gaming numbers in your message.

CapFrameX is on the same level as userbenchmark with regards to AMD. Best to ignore both unless you want to read something really wrong and misleading.
Quick search seems to suggest that yes, they are Userbenchmark-lite, if you will.
Speaking of UB. What will the poor chap do when zen5 hits and is faster in every single of his tests ? xD Will he sort the CPU's by his ranking this time ? xD
 
Jul 27, 2020
27,953
19,100
146

Focusing on the MT tests and keeping in mind that the Ryzen has 33% fewer threads:

File compression: Good
Navigation: Decent
HTML Browser: Almost on par
PDF renderer: Very good
Photo Library: Good
Clang: OK (was expecting better here)
Text processing: Outstanding
Asset compression: Good
Object detection: Good
Background blur: Outstanding
Horizon detection: Good
Object remover: Good
HDR: Very good
Photo filter: Good
Raytracer: Good
Structure from Motion: Good

In ST, the Ryzen knocks it out of the park in HDR, Object detection and text processing while being decent in Clang, PDF renderer and HTML5 browser.

Excellent MT performance against Intel despite only 24MB L3 cache.
 

CouncilorIrissa

Senior member
Jul 28, 2023
722
2,675
106
This should be the final score. David Huang got exactly 3k for the 5.0GHz SKU at Linux. Linux typically has 5% advantage, so it adds up exactly. Also the newest Lunar Lake result has basically exactly the same per clock performance.
That's probably it for the LPDDR5 devices, yes.
Some DDR5 devices will probably score around 3050-3100 (there are absolutely cracked Hawk Point runs doing 2700 with DDR5, whereas LPDDR5 runs hover around 2550)
 

Timmah!

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2010
1,571
935
136
Yes, you are completely wrong ;-) and it is precisely because bigger CCDs would not fit under the IHS. And by that I refer to 1 sIOD + up to 16 CCDs having to fit under Turin's IHS. Granite Ridge's IHS would certainly have room for a little bigger CCDs still. (Although maybe Granite Ridge and Turin might receive CCDs at differing steppings, I presume that the design is the same, just like it was shared between desktop and server in Zen1...Zen4.)

BTW, it has been speculated here that the density increase of Granite Ridge's CCD vs. Raphael's is not only thanks to the process bump, but also due to denser L3$ by means of tweaks which are not yet clear.
Well then its settled, did not consider Turin for sure, thx for correcting me.
 

Joe NYC

Diamond Member
Jun 26, 2021
3,630
5,173
136
Regarding CapframeX's not so cryptic tweet. I can believe it. The main reason I believe why is the same IOD & memory limitations of Zen 4. When looking at Zen 4 memory scaling testing for games, 4800 to 6000 shows a real, tangible difference due to the increase being in the same 1:1 ratio. Increases from 6000 1:2 to 8000 1:2 are either very small, or nothing at all. When you look at Intel scaling, they seem to achieve that same boost that AMD gets from 4800 to 6000 all the way to 8000+. No matter how good the core, its going to be limited in this regard. Until AMD improve mem controller and subsystem, the will always be behind the 8 ball in this regard.

Interesting how people are still comparing the unstable Raptor Lake performance to stable Zen performance.

Specifically, one of the ways to "stabilize" Raptor Lake is to turn down the memory speed, all the way down to 4800.

Also, on the Zen 5 side, apparently the internal IF clock can go to 2400, from 2000, so memory speed performance increases can go up to 7200. Although I am not sure if that works under current chipsets or only the upcoming new ones.