Question Zen 6 Speculation Thread

[adroc_thurston]

That's the only statement from you anyone needs to see to label you as "arrogant".

It's the truth.

Nobody uses iGPU's, companies just like to spend plenty of valuable die space with them on every consumer CPU

They, uh, don't.
Anything resembling a mainstream part always gets extremely heavy cutdowns on iGFX because no one actually uses it. What people want is good display and media cores.

If it was true that "no one uses iGPUs" like they claim

Yeah no one does.
Which is why 4 shader cores is all you need.
What you've meant to say is display/media core matters and I agree.
Actual GFX perf is completely irrelevant.

 

[Tigerick]

It's the truth.

They, uh, don't.
Anything resembling a mainstream part always gets extremely heavy cutdowns on iGFX because no one actually uses it. What people want is good display and media cores.

Yeah no one does.
Which is why 4 shader cores is all you need.
What you've meant to say is display/media core matters and I agree.
Actual GFX perf is completely irrelevant.

Another BS from adroc. I guess you made such statement because of Medusa roadmap:

• Medusa Point R7 comes with 8CU, lesser than 16CU of STX.
• But you omit AMD going to pair the SoC with 12-core Zen6 CPU, thus cutting CU most likely to preserve memory bandwidth. Not because of iGPU is not important.
• Medusa Halo might be cut: thus, you thought big iGPU is not important. However, you omit NV upcoming N1x with 48 SM. And I have theory why Medusa Halo might be cut, but that theory will have to wait.

Remember you talk non-sense saying we won't get more than 16 core from AMD ? And what did I told you ? And Zen5 costing $999?



It is sad that you believe blindly in the roadmap without your own judgement.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Which is why 4 shader cores is all you need.

You are just parroting AMD's iGPU decision for AM5. Well, they have a good reason for it because they also want to sell APUs and putting a large iGPU on the desktop parts will kill the need to have an APU and then AMD won't have any other place to dump their unused mobile dies.

 

[511]

By his logic M4Pro/Max shouldn't exist xDd

 

[adroc_thurston]

But you omit AMD going to pair the SoC with 12-core Zen6 CPU, thus cutting CU most likely to preserve memory bandwidth. Not because of iGPU is not important.

That's not how any of that works.
It's a mainstream part with a fat CPU tucked to the side.

You are just parroting AMD's iGPU decision for AM5

AM5 is not a relevant platform outside of DIY CPU.

Well, they have a good reason for it because they also want to sell APUs and putting a large iGPU on the desktop parts will kill the need to have an APU and then AMD won't have any other place to dump their unused mobile dies.

idk how any of that is relevant here.

By his logic M4Pro/Max shouldn't exist xDd

Fundamentally? yea.
But Apple has no interest in making dGPUs work (and very little market incentive to), so you get fat APUs.

 

[igor_kavinski]

AM5 is not a relevant platform outside of DIY CPU.

Oh so the millions of Lenovo and Dell and HP office PCs are not relevant?

A LOT of them have APUs, you know. The thing you say shouldn't exist or barely anyone uses.

 

[adroc_thurston]

Oh so the millions of Lenovo and Dell and HP office PCs are not relevant?

AMD has maybe 10% share in OEM desktop (generously).
So yeah, completely irrelevant.

The thing you say shouldn't exist or barely anyone uses.

APUs inherently exist since it's branding for stuff with iGFX. 9800X3D is an APU.
But expecting iGFX configs to get any bigger is silly.
Cost-cost-cost-cost. Gotta win on cost in relevant metrics, and iGFX is NOT a relevant metric. At all.

 

[igor_kavinski]

9800X3D is an APU.

You could call the 245K an APU but the 9800X3D with its pathetic iGPU performance (unless you want to play games from 2000 and earlier) does not qualify.

Now if AMD used the space taken by the non-V-cache CCD for iGPU real estate, THAT would be a proper APU.

 

[adroc_thurston]

You could call the 245K an APU but the 9800X3D with its pathetic iGPU performance (unless you want to play games from 2000 and earlier) does not qualify.

They all are APUs.
The actual iGFX perf is completely irrelevant as long as they have accelerator (the GPU) innit.

 

[igor_kavinski]

The actual iGFX perf is completely irrelevant as long as they have accelerator (the GPU) innit.

Yeah then the Raspberry Pi is a DIY desktop CPU too. I wonder why it isn't featured in regular CPU reviews that are often including Apple Silicon benchmarks.

 

[Joe NYC]

It is sad that you believe blindly in the roadmap without your own judgement.

I was almost blinded by your white background.

 

[adroc_thurston]

Yeah then the Raspberry Pi is a DIY desktop CPU too.

No, DIY implies a discrete CPU you slot into a mobo socket.
RPi is an SBC.

I wonder why it isn't featured in regular CPU reviews that are often including Apple Silicon benchmarks.

It actually sometimes is as a performance baseline.

 

[poke01]

I think Jeff Geerling uses the Pi and SBCs as a reference point in his videos.

 

[adroc_thurston]

I think Jeff Geerling uses the Pi and SBCs as a reference point in his videos.

It's a good baseline for perf evaluation tbf.

 

[igor_kavinski]

It's a good baseline for perf evaluation tbf.

In what sense? How are SBC CPUs relevant to anything?

 

[adroc_thurston]

In what sense?

Slowest possible cheaply available stuff that runs Linux.

How are SBC CPUs relevant to anything?

they, uh, run Linux.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Slowest possible cheaply available stuff that runs Linux.

We care about that when AMD doesn't even offer a Zen 5 based Ryzen 3 or an Athlon?

 

[adroc_thurston]

We care about that when AMD doesn't even offer a Zen 5 based Ryzen 3 or an Athlon?

Yeah because SBCs are widely available.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Yeah because SBCs are widely available.

And often overpriced.

 

[inquiss]

Not sure what sort of alternative reality @adroc_thurston and @LightningZ71 are living in, but in the real world the overwhelming majority of PCs are sold with iGPUs and don't ever use a dGPU. If it was true that "no one uses iGPUs" like they claim, neither AMD or Intel would bother including them, other than maybe a tiny tiny one intended only to display the BIOS screen.

No one uses igpus to game. So it can be tiny. Tiny tiny tiny.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Intel won't drop a 52 core onto the desktop. That 52 core will go in a server, which AMD will eat for lunch.

No, it's going to desktop, in probably tiny numbers as a vaporware product because it makes no real sense. Of course others have said the same thing (more or less) but it's worth mentioning the vaporware element of it. Don't expect to see a lot of these things.

They already do for MI series

Right, that'd be why AMD didn't bother with Turin-X . . .

 

[igor_kavinski]

No, it's going to desktop, in probably tiny numbers as a vaporware product because it makes no real sense. Of course others have said the same thing (more or less) but it's worth mentioning the vaporware element of it. Don't expect to see a lot of these things.

I think Intel executives are pissed that they couldn't win every non-game benchmark under the sun so this time their strategy will be core spam. Plus, the idea of 48 threads seems understandably scary to them when they couldn't even beat 16 real cores decisively with 24 real cores. I mean, I would put that in the hall of shame any day of the week. There is just zero excuse for virtual threads beating your real threads.

 

[adroc_thurston]

that'd be why AMD didn't bother with Turin-X . .

They did.
Turin-X was shelved because the main (functionally, only) customer (MS) opted for MI300C instead.

I think Intel executives are pissed that they couldn't win every non-game benchmark under the sun so this time their strategy will be core spam

They're not gonna win that with NVL-S 2t either.

 

[igor_kavinski]

They're not gonna win that with NVL-S 2t either.

I guess we'll have to see. If they are able to deliver a really good IMC and the interconnect bottlenecks are all sorted out (which hopefully they fix in Arrow Lake Refresh so we get a peek at that too), I think there's a very good chance that NVL can win at least 80% of the benchmarks thrown at it. If not, Intel is in deep trouble.

Plus, under Linux, recompilation for APX may also give Intel an edge.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

Anything resembling a mainstream part always gets extremely heavy cutdowns on iGFX because no one actually uses it. What people want is good display and media cores.

Sounds like we went from "no one uses it" to "they don't get used in mainstream parts".


There's a big difference here. Especially with @Kepler_L2 mentioning an APU capable of doing 200TOPs through its shader processors.



I guess there will be both low-end APUs (Krackan successors) and CPU-focused (Granite Ridge successors) APUs with small iGPUs like there are today. But your previous suggestion that larger iGPUs are dead was, and still is, very odd. Every SoC IHV worth mentioning out there keeps putting bigger and more capable iGPUs each generation. AMD will obviously not let themselves fall behind.