AMD Details Carrizo Mobile APU Chips Coming in 2015

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...eclares-carrizo-on-time-and-coming-in-1h-2015

I cant wait to see the overall performance this will have. If it has come far enough along by the time I have the money to do so my next "upgrade" will be an AMD APU and I will not have to worry about a higher spec gpu to enjoy modern games at good setting/resolution, maybe by then the oculus headset type things will also be a reasonable price/performance so an APU will have that much more available performance to use.

Good times, good times.
 
Sounds exciting.

The only negative point is most OEMs are strong-armed into using Intel...

However, if companies can provide motherboards of different form factors and other niche packaged solutions such as SoC and SBCs, that would be great.
 
I hope to see the regular version in some good cheap options, like NUC form factors.
 
Sounds exciting.

The only negative point is most OEMs are strong-armed into using Intel...

However, if companies can provide motherboards of different form factors and other niche packaged solutions such as SoC and SBCs, that would be great.

That is why I don't understand how Intel has managed to get away with the tactics they use in the US. Even back during AMD's glory days of superior CPUs, they were hard to find because of how Intel pressures their "partners." These days, AMD is a harder sell because they only compete at the lower end of the spectrum which is actually all that the vast majority of people really need. My old HP laptop with a Turion 64 x2 is starting to get old so this will likely be a good upgrade pathway as I intend to replace this when the next version of Windows comes out.
 
Intel strong arm during the X64 days wasn't very needed. AMD could barely fill orders as it was, Intel managed to maintain primary advertising and pulled some shenanigans in the benchmarks.

OEMs probably won't be rushing to advertise products with this. It's just not nearly as flashy as Intel products.
 
i have both intel and amd pc's, and I find I need more cpu power most of the time. So Intel fits the bill.
AMD still can't beat Intel on raw cpu power
 
i have both intel and amd pc's, and I find I need more cpu power most of the time. So Intel fits the bill.
AMD still can't beat Intel on raw cpu power
 
Intel/Nvidia pull crap like that all the time, every company has issues by all means, but the one that is hurting the most, seems to be the one that tries as hard as they might to do what they can when they can without screwing their competition over directly.

If AMD today were to pull up a list of everything they both have done to intentionally screw their business they would be loaded, they do not have the $ to even bother trying.

Raw cpu power is what is needed currently, give it a bit of time however and the multi-core will matter much more to leverage say the power of consoles and such, so Intel by and large will be relegated to the ultra high end possibly low power niches, AMD with the way they are able to leverage their graphics designs may not need massive cpu grunt IPC wise but will instead rely on many-cores.

If they can do to cpu/gpu(APU) what gpu did years ago combining vertex and pixel into multi-function units, so that each "core" of the cpu can be used as they need it, then they will have amazing power on their hands, I think that is what AMD will be able to leverage much easier then Intel will be able to, unless they buy Nv up to do this as well.

Anyways, yes 2016 will be very interesting to see what they came up with, back to the "true" big cores, and not the "8 core" shenanigans.
 
The problem though is will AMD be able to survive until their next big thing arrives? Very few companies can bleed cash like they do and still hang around.
 
Intel/Nvidia pull crap like that all the time, every company has issues by all means, but the one that is hurting the most, seems to be the one that tries as hard as they might to do what they can when they can without screwing their competition over directly.

If AMD today were to pull up a list of everything they both have done to intentionally screw their business they would be loaded, they do not have the $ to even bother trying.

Raw cpu power is what is needed currently, give it a bit of time however and the multi-core will matter much more to leverage say the power of consoles and such, so Intel by and large will be relegated to the ultra high end possibly low power niches, AMD with the way they are able to leverage their graphics designs may not need massive cpu grunt IPC wise but will instead rely on many-cores.

If they can do to cpu/gpu(APU) what gpu did years ago combining vertex and pixel into multi-function units, so that each "core" of the cpu can be used as they need it, then they will have amazing power on their hands, I think that is what AMD will be able to leverage much easier then Intel will be able to, unless they buy Nv up to do this as well.

Anyways, yes 2016 will be very interesting to see what they came up with, back to the "true" big cores, and not the "8 core" shenanigans.

AMD is already leveraging some OpenCL advantages but it isn't catching on quick at all. Smaller, more specific programs are adding OpenCL capabilities but seeing as you can always get this group an add-in card you aren't really gaining much of an advantage.

AMD will probably do what they have been doing and just push a product in a way that makes it compete performance wise and sell it for less, just to stay relevant. OpenCL will be a nice win in the battle but it won't win them the war like x64 did. If they try to do something radical like Bulldozer again they could screw themselves over for longer than imagined.

I really wish they had stuck with the Phenom II recipe.
 
I wish they had refined Phenom further then they had as well, mostly cause it is one of the coolest names they have ever done XD. Next Uarch is supposed to be going back to that type of design overall more then likely with much of the lessons they have learned with BD and the other things brought forth in last few years.

Like I said, and this is IMHO. If they can remake the cpu the way that gpu were remade not all that many years ago, that would open a fundamental shift in the way everyone uses cpu/gpu from a design standpoint, not saying I am an engineer in any way shape or form, I think it would be a paradigm as it was to have "programmable shaders was" to have a programmable design like this that can leverage the benefits of both x86 processors and graphics clusters all in one unit.

I believe HSA was one step towards that goal, Carrizo is also making a larger step towards that end goal it seems. To build a cpu that has x cpu parts x gpu parts, if one could make it that everything was more seemless that will make it quite potent.

Just as a thought, Intel did this with their Xeon Phi cards which are pure x86 cores, so why can AMD not do this leveraging both their x86 and gpu capabilities more then they are currently?

Anyways, I think the only thing saving AMD bacon overall is being backed UAE I am quite sure they will not let them go down, probably a major factor in them staying alive during this whole bulldozer stuff, over the last couple of years, IF they manage to hang on and the direction they are taking pans out, it will have benefitted them well.

When you are at the bottom of the well, there is only one way to go if you aren't giving in, and that's up ^.^
 
I wish they had refined Phenom further then they had as well, mostly cause it is one of the coolest names they have ever done XD. Next Uarch is supposed to be going back to that type of design overall more then likely with much of the lessons they have learned with BD and the other things brought forth in last few years.

You bring up many good points, I'm going to chop up your post a bit to make this conversation a bit clearer. I don't particularly like doing this though so I will probably mess this up! :D I just want to make clear, I'm not trying to disagree with your opinion and you do have very good views. :)

Like I said, and this is IMHO. If they can remake the cpu the way that gpu were remade not all that many years ago, that would open a fundamental shift in the way everyone uses cpu/gpu from a design standpoint, not saying I am an engineer in any way shape or form, I think it would be a paradigm as it was to have "programmable shaders was" to have a programmable design like this that can leverage the benefits of both x86 processors and graphics clusters all in one unit.

I believe HSA was one step towards that goal, Carrizo is also making a larger step towards that end goal it seems. To build a cpu that has x cpu parts x gpu parts, if one could make it that everything was more seemless that will make it quite potent.

I see where you are going with the "remake" but its a simplification of parts already supplied. When the GPU was "remade" they created a Shader Unit, and what AMD did was put a few clusters of these insanely small, specific processing cores ontop of a very weak CPU. Which that's all its going to be. Combining the two doesn't solve the remake problem, if AMD wanted to make it bigger it would end up compounding in R&D costs when all you have to do is buy a better CPU and a better GPU and you literally have what the APU offers without the limitations. What AMD has is something similar, very small scale but doesn't offer anything other then simplified computing and advertised towards gamers or cheap system builders.

IF AMD were to re-do the consumer CPU scene they would have to think of something different, radical even. HSA, while awesome from a developer stand point is really a solution to a problem that plagues Systems on a Chip (like AMD's APU).

Just as a thought, Intel did this with their Xeon Phi cards which are pure x86 cores, so why can AMD not do this leveraging both their x86 and gpu capabilities more then they are currently?

Yea, the Phi didn't do well. AMD does push their FireGL products that are fairly damn good at what they do but I don't think AMD currently has the means to produce a product like the Phi (which remind you didn't take off quite like Intel wanted) and bring it to servers. But they still have GCN2.0 which is an awesome architecture, just nothing for pure x86 that I'm aware of.

Anyways, I think the only thing saving AMD bacon overall is being backed UAE I am quite sure they will not let them go down, probably a major factor in them staying alive during this whole bulldozer stuff, over the last couple of years, IF they manage to hang on and the direction they are taking pans out, it will have benefitted them well.

When you are at the bottom of the well, there is only one way to go if you aren't giving in, and that's up ^.^

UAE may be saving their green butts, but I don't think AMD is really that bad. I foresee them picking themselves up after this Bulldozer fiasco and bringing much better products to the table in 2016. Hell this Carrizo looks tempting as all hell already, I want to get it just for HSA alone. I think they are going to be ok, really their products are working right now and very much worth their asking price.
 
Sometime in 2015? Does that mean the first couple of days of 2016, or December 30th, 2015, sorta like their crossfire frame pacing driver launch for DX11 (which they have yet to date to deliver a fix for DX9/10 titles which are the vast majority of games still!)?
 
The problem though is will AMD be able to survive until their next big thing arrives? Very few companies can bleed cash like they do and still hang around.

I hope so, I don't want to see the GPU market become like the CPU one where it's basically a monopoly for people wanting performance :(.
 
Those seem to suffer from the same problem previous APUs had -

Business and non gamers need cpu power and efficiency with minimal gpu
Gamers need lot more gpu power than any apu can provide

So they will again be targeting small niche of budget laptops with some gaming power.
 
The point is to change the dynamics of computing. AMD has been working towards this since back in 2000. Intel was secretly working on it even before that with MAC. The architecture of a PC composed of a motherboard loaded with controllers and interfaces is a freakin dinosaur and holding things back. The idea is that if you can create an HSA system, it cuts out the middleman/ware, and there is likely very little performance benefit to be gained. You might have an add-in card for load or peripheral purposes, but you wouldn't have a dedicated GPU as, regardless as how fast it is, it's just way more efficient and faster to do it on the die with a heterogenous system that works seamlessly with software designed for it. Or, I dunno, maybe boards are designed for multiple HSA units and you can just drop in another one like sticks of RAM. The goal is coalesce the gpu and the cpu into a single unit.

APU is a step there. It's a really small step. It's a proof of concept that controller/gpu/cpu can exist and work together on the same die. The goal is that the 'controller' is simply the hardware interface, and the gpu and cpu are indistinguishiable and for intents and purposes the same exact thing. Software has to change too, and a paradigm shift needs to happen. People have already seen the declining returns of the die shrink. This was projected 15 years ago.

AMD keeps pushing this. We know Intel was also working on this and went dark on it, so they might have 15 years of research into this too when the 'shrink' folds on them.

APU's might be garbage now and not particularly suited for anything, but they are immature stepping stones to the greater thing that IS coming, that exist in an environment that is not designed for them and based in a retiring model.
 
Also, I do want to underline that an AMD's APU, is not the goal. It's still the same dinosaur compressed to a chip. Again, more things need to happen on the soft computing side, for this to take the next step. 10 years from now, I imagine we will have drastically different computer architecture. You will have multiple sockets on your 'motherboard' for HSA units. Perhaps everything will eventually be an HSA unit. It's not simply heterogenous to it's own power, but the entire system is essentially ANDROGENOUS.
 
If they can squeeze a Radeon 7870-Class GPU into the PS4's APU, how long until we see that on the desktop/laptop? Is Carrizo it?
 
Also, I do want to underline that an AMD's APU, is not the goal. It's still the same dinosaur compressed to a chip. Again, more things need to happen on the soft computing side, for this to take the next step. 10 years from now, I imagine we will have drastically different computer architecture. You will have multiple sockets on your 'motherboard' for HSA units. Perhaps everything will eventually be an HSA unit. It's not simply heterogenous to it's own power, but the entire system is essentially ANDROGENOUS.

You might be right altrough I belive 10 years is way too optimistic for such drastic change as it took 5-6 years since first quad core desktop cpu to reach point when 4 threads support is common. And using more than 4 threads by software is still in early stages.

Still none of that if relevant for buying pc parts in 2015 as they will be replaced in few years.
 
I don't buy into the whole "APU" thing, and IMO its just more marketing than anything else.

Intel has the same product, they just take a different approach. They remain focused on CPU processing power with a very small but lightweight integrated graphics solution, which can then work as a hybrid to switch to dedicated graphics when real power is needed, which reduces noise, temps, and power draw.

AMD has merely dedicated over half of their processor dye to the integrated graphics, so of course you have far more powerful graphics, but how strong are they really? The answer is "not very", and it makes sense because otherwise it would have really high thermal requirements. And this comes at the sacrifice of a weaker processor.

Now most games don't require a strong processor, and so emphasizing graphics makes sense. But considering how fast PCIe is getting, I just don't see the benefit for a desktop, and much prefer the intel "hybrid" solution become mainstream.
 
I don't buy into the whole "APU" thing, and IMO its just more marketing than anything else.

Intel has the same product, they just take a different approach. They remain focused on CPU processing power with a very small but lightweight integrated graphics solution, which can then work as a hybrid to switch to dedicated graphics when real power is needed, which reduces noise, temps, and power draw.

AMD has merely dedicated over half of their processor dye to the integrated graphics, so of course you have far more powerful graphics, but how strong are they really? The answer is "not very", and it makes sense because otherwise it would have really high thermal requirements. And this comes at the sacrifice of a weaker processor.

:cough:

Screen%20Shot%202013-05-31%20at%207.59.16%20PM_575px.png
 
Those seem to suffer from the same problem previous APUs had -

Business and non gamers need cpu power and efficiency with minimal gpu
Gamers need lot more gpu power than any apu can provide

So they will again be targeting small niche of budget laptops with some gaming power.

for now, the gpu portion in these chips is quite potent, who knows where it will be next generation or so, and until these are actually tested/bm who knows how fast overall these will be as well.

I have high hopes for AMD, I want them to do well as many of us need lower cost products if we intend to play higher spec games and such on PC. AMD needs something to compete with Intel while keeping their ASP high enough to actually turn profit and market share, and they hopefully have had some time to refine the R-300 series as well to better compete with Nv without cutting their own throats.

I use them for cost/stability/life expectancy and have not been let down yet, so I hope they do well and are around for decades yet.
 

don't forget the XB1/PS4 are also using these APU albeit larger, and they manage to stuff at least in PS4 case a 7870 into that thing, that is no small feat, and tons of graphics crunch, so maybe desktop wise as you are trying to say, it might be "a fad" but I do not think it is, they are trying to integrate as much as they can into one package, gpu was next step, the more refined their process, the more crunch they can do, the overall better performing they will get, thermals are part of the issue for sure, but gpu core are not nearly as much a chunk of that as they are "simple" but many cores vs the cpu, and operate at a much lower clock speed.

Anyways, Intel spends I think it was 35-40% of die space on top end versions of their IGP towards the "APU" so I very much doubt Intel would waste their time and $$ doing this if they thought it as a waste, and in the real world there has been many places it has been used quite successfully. Desktop wise as well, for us "gamers" might be a bit yet before it sees a true benefit, I think once the IGP can deal well with any dedicated GPU that would be great.
 
don't forget the XB1/PS4 are also using these APU albeit larger, and they manage to stuff at least in PS4 case a 7870 into that thing, that is no small feat, and tons of graphics crunch, so maybe desktop wise as you are trying to say, it might be "a fad" but I do not think it is, they are trying to integrate as much as they can into one package, gpu was next step, the more refined their process, the more crunch they can do, the overall better performing they will get, thermals are part of the issue for sure, but gpu core are not nearly as much a chunk of that as they are "simple" but many cores vs the cpu, and operate at a much lower clock speed.

Anyways, Intel spends I think it was 35-40% of die space on top end versions of their IGP towards the "APU" so I very much doubt Intel would waste their time and $$ doing this if they thought it as a waste, and in the real world there has been many places it has been used quite successfully. Desktop wise as well, for us "gamers" might be a bit yet before it sees a true benefit, I think once the IGP can deal well with any dedicated GPU that would be great.


PS4 apu has to run stuff like BF4 or AC:unity in 900p and that's most powerfull APU made so far with access to unified memory and custom made operating system.
 
Yes, they have also brought forth new memory and so on, I do not think it will be long before the APU are considered "great" for most users, it will be the enthusiasts running insane resolutions or multiple monitors and so forth that will still require more dedicated hardware and such.

One of my buddies uses A10-5800k with 1600Mhz ram, not an insanely powerful setup by any means, he plays BF3/BF4 on it using a mix of medium and low settings at 1680x1050 resolution, as he put it "It works, sometimes is a little less then I would like, but, the next step up cost wise I simply did not have the money, so for me I am quite happy that I went with this"

Anyways, point it, it will not be much longer when APU will be considered more mainstream, and less umm budget? For me I have shied away not only due to $ but also because at least at the moment the IGP does not pair well with any gpu, the moment that there is a simply on/off switch for the IGP so one can use any gpu and/or the IGP pair with any gpu such as on the fly low power usage for streaming etc, this will make it matter much more.
 
So it's going to be Carrizo versus Cherry Trail. Intel hit a homerun with Bay Trail and AMD had nothing really to compete with it. And Intel has been pretty aggressive with pricing and coming up with Bay Trail versions for the cheapest of devices. I would love for AMD to have a solid offering in Carrizo, they really need to execute something well in the low power x86 market.
 
Back
Top