Question Zen 6 Speculation Thread

[adroc_thurston]

So the CCDs are identical this time between server, desktop and desktop replacement?

not really? They're still different Vt's et al.

Let's just say I'll believe it once I see it for myself.

that's just how 2.5D slabs work.

 

[OneEng2]

Can't believe this needs to be stated, but why on earth are you comparing CCD area (meaning, only cores + IFOP) and the whole SoC, that has the CPU cores, the NPU, memory controllers and a relatively big iGPU? This is not an apples-to-apples comparison.

To the best of my understanding, the whole SoC is quite large. A single CCD is quite small. Don't look at it as the cumulation of CCD's is X mm2. Look at it as "I can get X number of good products from Y number of wafers" and "Total cost of one big SoC is X and Total cost of chiplets to do the same thing is Y".

Chiplets have proven to be a superior method of achieving the most value per $. Monolithic designs have proven to be superior in overall performance.

Chiplets also offer design modularity at a level beyond what can be reached with monolithic designs.

So my point is that should AMD desire to match the performance of M5 with Zen 6, and cost wasn't a factor, and modularity wasn't a factor, and scalability wasn't a factor, they could do it, but the design would be quite different than the Zen 6 we will be getting.

So it is an Apples to Apples comparison. Zen 6 is a more saleable design in both number of cores AND performance per $ (and likely design effort efficiency across a broad range of products).

If AMD's Zen 6 design targets were the same as M4, I am certain Zen 6 would look much more like M4.

 

[poke01]

To the best of my understanding, the whole SoC is quite large. A single CCD is quite small. Don't look at it as the cumulation of CCD's is X mm2. Look at it as "I can get X number of good products from Y number of wafers" and "Total cost of one big SoC is X and Total cost of chiplets to do the same thing is Y".

Chiplets have proven to be a superior method of achieving the most value per $. Monolithic designs have proven to be superior in overall performance.

Chiplets also offer design modularity at a level beyond what can be reached with monolithic designs.

So my point is that should AMD desire to match the performance of M5 with Zen 6, and cost wasn't a factor, and modularity wasn't a factor, and scalability wasn't a factor, they could do it, but the design would be quite different than the Zen 6 we will be getting.

So it is an Apples to Apples comparison. Zen 6 is a more saleable design in both number of cores AND performance per $ (and likely design effort efficiency across a broad range of products).

If AMD's Zen 6 design targets were the same as M4, I am certain Zen 6 would look much more like M4.

You do know the most comparable product to M4 that AMD makes is Strix Point, a monolithic laptop SoC?

 

[adroc_thurston]

You do know the most comparable product to M4 that AMD makes is Strix Point, a monolithic laptop SoC?

AMD doesn't make tablet parts.

 

[poke01]

AMD doesn't make tablet parts.

The point I’m trying to make is that AMD also makes monolithic SoCs for mobile