Question Zen 6 Speculation Thread

[DrMrLordX]

Would it require more than the 10 PCB layers used on $500 to $600 consumer mobos? I think I've seen server mobos using 8 PCB layers with hexachannel RAM support.

Unknown. Keep in mind that server mobos are probably designed with lower memory speeds in mind, which (probably) requires less signal integrity while also producing less crosstalk. Or I may just be talking out of my arse on this one.

 

[Markfw]

Unknown. Keep in mind that server mobos are probably designed with lower memory speeds in mind, which (probably) requires less signal integrity while also producing less crosstalk. Or I may just be talking out of my arse on this one.

Well, it used to be 2666. NOW on some Zen 5 boards its 6000. (I have one of those on my Turin)

 

[eek2121]

Well, it used to be 2666. NOW on some Zen 5 boards its 6000. (I have one of those on my Turin)

You remind me of an important point. Quad channel DDR5-6000 should be much faster than the fastest memory configs you can cook up today. Combine that with low latency CL26 and you have quite the platform.

 

[Markfw]

You remind me of an important point. Quad channel DDR5-6000 should be much faster than the fastest memory configs you can cook up today. Combine that with low latency CL26 and you have quite the platform.

And what of 12 channel 6000 CL30 ? mine)

 

[fastandfurious6]

high-end CPUs i.e. Ryzen 9 definitely deserve quad channel

cost shouldn't be that higher

 

[adroc_thurston]

cost shouldn't be that higher

It is THAT higher on SOC and platform level.
Christ, stop being poor. Just buy a Threadripper.

 

[maddie]

It is THAT higher on SOC and platform level.
Christ, stop being poor. Just buy a Threadripper.

Donation?

 

[igor_kavinski]

Christ, stop being poor. Just buy a Threadripper.

It's not being poor that's preventing a lot of people from owning TRs here. It's the possibility of ending up on the street AFTER buying one.

By the way, quick question for you. I see Emerald Rapids chips selling really cheap on eBay. Are these fake or are the cloud providers chucking them out and replacing them with Granite Rapids chips on the same mobo?

 

[adroc_thurston]

or are the cloud providers chucking them out

This. EMR was always supposes to be a short lived roadmap plug.

and replacing them with Granite Rapids chips on the same mobo?

No can do, Eagle Stream and Birch Stream are fully incompatible platforms.

 

[OneEng2]

I believe the need for massive core counts and massive bandwidth to be a niche. One better suited to Thread Ripper.

Zen 6 needs to be targeted at the 90%, not the 10% market IMO.

 

[reaperrr3]

I believe the need for massive core counts and massive bandwidth to be a niche. One better suited to Thread Ripper.

Zen 6 needs to be targeted at the 90%, not the 10% market IMO.

This.

The areas where Intel still dominates volume and is the most competitive are mobile and office/commercial.
In other words, what we'd call mid-range and low-end.
Those are the CPU areas where AMD still has the most room to grow in terms of volume, and here, 8-12 cores with SMT and dual-channel are still sufficient for most workloads.

For gamers, bandwidth limitations can be worked around with large L3/VCache.
For professional and semi-pro, you're supposed to buy Threadripper if the regular Ryzen x950X on AM5 isn't enough.

 

[Hulk]

This.

The areas where Intel still dominates volume and is the most competitive are mobile and office/commercial.
In other words, what we'd call mid-range and low-end.
Those are the CPU areas where AMD still has the most room to grow in terms of volume, and here, 8-12 cores with SMT and dual-channel are still sufficient for most workloads.

For gamers, bandwidth limitations can be worked around with large L3/VCache.
For professional and semi-pro, you're supposed to buy Threadripper if the regular Ryzen x950X on AM5 isn't enough.

So what improvements in Zen 6 as compared to Zen 5 will grow the mid-range and low-end besides simply providing more volume at lower prices, which could be better acheived with Zen 5 actually?

 

[Glo.]

If anyone hasn't noticed, the floor of the performance ALWAYS rises, whereas ceiling doesn't have to always rise. In order to push performance ceiling we HAVE to add more cores, and more bandwidth, now. One of the reasons why 95% of people are better of with laptops these days is because how high the performance floor is.

Don't be surprised if something like Kraken-like part will be the entry level, low-end to lower mid-range part. For that 95% of market.

 

[OneEng2]

So what improvements in Zen 6 as compared to Zen 5 will grow the mid-range and low-end besides simply providing more volume at lower prices, which could be better acheived with Zen 5 actually?

I believe that core counts will be increased, and as a result, the shared cache for a CCX will increase. Also, the IOD will improve (lower latency and higher bandwidth), and the process will improve.

The end result will be that the mid range and low end parts for Zen 6 will be higher performance across the board as well as operating in a lower power envelope as compared to Zen 5.

Many here have speculated slightly higher clocks, and slightly higher IPC resulting in single threaded performance increase of ~15-20%. Only in highly threaded applications will Zen 6 "blow away" Zen 5 IMO.

 

[Hulk]

I believe that core counts will be increased, and as a result, the shared cache for a CCX will increase. Also, the IOD will improve (lower latency and higher bandwidth), and the process will improve.

The end result will be that the mid range and low end parts for Zen 6 will be higher performance across the board as well as operating in a lower power envelope as compared to Zen 5.

Many here have speculated slightly higher clocks, and slightly higher IPC resulting in single threaded performance increase of ~15-20%. Only in highly threaded applications will Zen 6 "blow away" Zen 5 IMO.

Interesting.

But considering the importance of price on the low to mid-range and the relative parity of performance in that part of the stack between AMD and Intel, at the end of the day isn't price the biggest factor in this market segment? And of course the ability to ship huge volume?

I guess the more poignant question is why does Intel currently own this segment? What are they doing to "right?"

 

[eek2121]

And what of 12 channel 6000 CL30 ? mine)

Bonkers. 🤣

It is THAT higher on SOC and platform level.
Christ, stop being poor. Just buy a Threadripper.

I think it is less about being poor and more about value proposition and/or trade-offs.

There was a time until recently where I would’ve picked up a new Threadripper machine with little thought. It accelerated the work I did so it would’ve made sense. However, it wasn’t good at gaming, something I spend many hours doing even today.

AMD’s huge flaw, whether they realize and/or care, is that they don’t have a single chip that is an ultimate solution for folks like me. I am not alone in thinking this, which is why a lot of folks have been annoyed by the lack of a higher core count or an in between offering.

AMD needs to raise boost clocks on TR while keeping costs down or they need to boost IO and core counts on Ryzen.

IMO Perhaps a better solution would be to make. EPYC the server/workstation chip and Threadripper the ultimate enthusiast chip.

Regardless, we know they aren’t planning on most of that for Zen 6.

 

[dr1337]

If anyone hasn't noticed, the floor of the performance ALWAYS rises, whereas ceiling doesn't have to always rise. In order to push performance ceiling we HAVE to add more cores, and more bandwidth, now. One of the reasons why 95% of people are better of with laptops these days is because how high the performance floor is.

Don't be surprised if something like Kraken-like part will be the entry level, low-end to lower mid-range part. For that 95% of market.

nahhhh what are you talking about? 4c/4t 2500k's are still more than good enough!

I personally find it interesting how many people, vocal on the internet about technology, seemingly never have forward thinking. If AMD can get 10% ST while doubling MT, objectively its a better generation than non-X3D Zen5.

 

[Win2012R2]

AMD’s huge flaw, whether they realize and/or care, is that they don’t have a single chip that is an ultimate solution for folks like me.

You can get Epyc 9575F - 64 cores and it boosts to 5 Ghz, so should be ok for games.

It's also possible to get a Rolls Royce as part of the package deal, but you'll have to pay for it just like for the expensive chip that you want.

I am not alone in thinking this, which is why a lot of folks have been annoyed by the lack of a higher core count or an in between offering.

They can't offer more cores without cannibalising Epyc server segment that gives them far more profit per core than desktop ever will.

If Zen 6 really gives 24 cores, it will already start eating into 32 core Epycs, especially with higher clocks of "desktop" version, only downside is much lower mem bandwidth, which is why I am sure they don't want to do multi-chiplet 3D cache.

 

[StefanR5R]

You can get Epyc 9575F - 64 cores and it boosts to 5 Ghz, so should be ok for games.

Memory access latency, and price/core are differing though.

 

[Win2012R2]

Memory access latency, and price/core are differing though.

But the main is price, right?

 

[MS_AT]

Those are the CPU areas where AMD still has the most room to grow in terms of volume, and here, 8-12 cores with SMT and dual-channel are still sufficient for most workloads.

To be fair, quad channel let's you get by with lower clocked DRAMs. I mean I can understand the overclockers prefer 2 channel high clocked chips they can fine tune for fun. But myself I would prefer just plug and play and not be penalized for it. And 4 channel 4800MHz will be easier to stabilize than 2x channel 8000MHz, with tad higher bandwidth and higher available capacities. Provided of course the IOD links see improvements.

For gamers, bandwidth limitations can be worked around with large L3/VCache.

It is mostly latency it helps with.

 

[OneEng2]

Interesting.

But considering the importance of price on the low to mid-range and the relative parity of performance in that part of the stack between AMD and Intel, at the end of the day isn't price the biggest factor in this market segment? And of course the ability to ship huge volume?

I guess the more poignant question is why does Intel currently own this segment? What are they doing to "right?"

Good points all.

I guess the question is if AMD will chose to create a CCX with less cores just for use in the low to mid-range? My thought was that the compute tile, while being produced on the highest cost process (I am still betting it is N3P for desktop and N2 will only be used on DC), current 8 core, N4P Zen 5 CCX is only 70.6mm2, so each of the 8 cores is about 7 mm2 with L2 cache (I allowed 2 core parts to be used for the glue logic). My thought is that there will be lots of 12 core CCX die that don't yield all 12 cores well leaving room for the 10, 8, and 6 core versions. If I am right about the N3P, I expect that Zen 6 12 core CCX will still weigh in around that same number. If it is N2, then it will certainly reach this size (and maybe smaller?). Still your point is quite valid. If mid and low end cost efficiency is the design target, it may well make sense for AMD to create an 8 core CCX for this market.

I am not certain why Intel continues to enjoy such success in the corporate market. I know in the past, Intel offered "bundle" deals on chipsets, mb's, etc, etc. Also, I believe they would penalize (incentivize ?) corporate accounts to have "Intel only" deals.

I am not sure if this is still the case today or not.

 

[jpiniero]

I am not certain why Intel continues to enjoy such success in the corporate market.

Corpos don't care about performance in the way that you think and Raptor Lake is cheap.

 

[Hulk]

Corpos don't care about performance in the way that you think and Raptor Lake is cheap.

This.

When you walk into a municpal building you'll invariably see some mid-range Dell systems. Or lots of SMF strapped to the back of monitors at the DMV. This is where Intel seems to be ubiquitious. From what I see where I work upgrades don't come due to a lack of compute but rather someone has an issue that persists, always software but nobody is around to do the lifting to fix it. The boss gets fed up and says just get a new PC. They other workers get jealous and it goes around. Hold for a few years and then someone's PC's acts up. Rinse and repeat.

 

[Thunder 57]

You can get Epyc 9575F - 64 cores and it boosts to 5 Ghz, so should be ok for games.

It's also possible to get a Rolls Royce as part of the package deal, but you'll have to pay for it just like for the expensive chip that you want.

They can't offer more cores without cannibalising Epyc server segment that gives them far more profit per core than desktop ever will.

If Zen 6 really gives 24 cores, it will already start eating into 32 core Epycs, especially with higher clocks of "desktop" version, only downside is much lower mem bandwidth, which is why I am sure they don't want to do multi-chiplet 3D cache.

And PCIe lanes. I'm using probably every last one.