• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper TR6 "Mustang Peak" Arrives with "Zen 6" and PCIe 6.0

erek

erek

Fully [H]
2FA
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
17,427
another rumor from a single unknown random X user….

“In previous leaks, we learned that "Zen 6" increased the core count to 12 cores per CCD. This is an improvement over the 8 cores per CCD that "Zen 5" currently offers in non-dense configurations. If the CPU maintains its maximum configuration of 12 CCDs, it would result in 144 cores and 288 threads, which is 50% higher than the 96-core, 192-thread configuration of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9995WX. AMD's documentation did not suggest any launch date, indicating that we are still months away from the actual release. AMD is likely to start shipping the first "Zen 6" CPUs in the form of server EPYC SKUs, followed by consumer Ryzen, with the HEDT platform being released later.“

Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/350081/...-mustang-peak-arrives-with-zen-6-and-pcie-6-0
 
1781795373376.png
 
I hope we see a 32c AM6 at some point. Now with dimm coming that are 128gb a dimm. Nvme drives that are 8TB now. Maybe even bigger in the future.
 
If DDR6 is there and do what it claim it will, I imagine AMD could do the 32 cores system on those (with how strong successor to zen6 cores dual bandwith ddr5 could make 32cores a bit niche, that much compute with so little bandwith per core, but ddr6 could get twice as fast as reasonable current ddr5 setup)
 
Epyon said:
I hope we see a 32c AM6 at some point. Now with dimm coming that are 128gb a dimm. Nvme drives that are 8TB now. Maybe even bigger in the future.
Click to expand...
I hope that we can afford all this, especially the RAM and NVMe drives by say 2030. Besides won't all the AI datacenters want these so they can upgrade? :mad:
 
32 core client Zen6 seems unlikely. They seem to use one type of CCD per generation. At 32-core model would require 3 CCDs, then, with a total of 4 cores disabled, which is assymetric in at least 2 ways, and maybe it wouldn't even fit on the substrate?
 
1_rick said:
32 core client Zen6 seems unlikely. They seem to use one type of CCD per generation. At 32-core model would require 3 CCDs, then, with a total of 4 cores disabled, which is assymetric in at least 2 ways, and maybe it wouldn't even fit on the substrate?
Click to expand...
very unlikely, Epyon point of AM6 would be zen7 or even 8 as AM5 will support zen4-5-6 at least and possibly 7, you need faster ram for that amount of cores for lot of high cores use case and a platform change to support that faster ram.
 
I will never understand why they'll do "EPYC first, then consumer Ryzen, then Threadripper". In the old days, the HEDT (back when that meant something) released BEFORE the mainstream and that was part of the benefit. Zen6 having 12 cores per CCD is..okay I suppose, nice step up. However, if they're serious about Threadripper they need to get it back to being a "costs more, but does more, best of both worlds" platform. That means putting 3D Vcache on it and ensuring some cores are capable of performing single/few core frequencies and performance equal or better than Ryzen, for enthusiast use.. It may never do as much as EPYC and that's okay for the server heavily parallel workload group, but the additional PCI-E lanes, ideally quad channel RAM, and other benefits make it a step up for those who do something besides pure desktop usage but not enough to justify professional grade server hardware etc.

In late generations it seems like Threadripper has been stupidly expensive EPYC JR only for people who can't afford the real thing, as opposed to the HEDT multi-workload benefit it used to be. I'd love for them to come back to what made HEDT worthwhile, but its getting increasingly frustrating how prices keep getting jacked and we get less and less in comparison, later and later. That's even before the delineation between Threadripper and TR PRO and the insane RAM prices etc.
 
Yeah, I am talking about the next socket change it would be nice to have 32 cores with out going thread ripper. For my work it would be cool as hell. But hey I will take 24 very strong cores that = a thread ripper of today. or close to it.
 
Epyon said:
Zen 7 or 8 or what ever jeez i just want 32c on something other then thread ripper
Click to expand...
It would be nice, but at least we'll get 24c. AMD has rightly over the past decade or so broke the barrier that used to be the quad-core limit Intel had for years on mainstream chips. Ryzen coming up to 8c, and then 16c were big steps up in this regard. Unfortunately, they didn't seem to keep up in terms of PCI-E lanes and RAM channels - two factors which, absent "real enthusiast HEDT", are more necessary than ever for AMD's Ryzen platform.

Zen chips benefit significantly from quality RAM - not just speed, buit CL and other factors and having a good EXPO kit led to meanignful performance gain. THat's a reason it seems so strange to me that, when delineating t he Ryzen chipsets from A820, B850, X870, X870E etc... that the highest end ones do not come with the option for quad-channel RAM. I know it would take a little reorganization for a controller capale of it, and users just wanting to stick to dual channel could just populate two sticks the same way that you can use a single channel configuration today, but it would be a nice step forward if they don't intend for Threadripper to be made for enthusiasts, how Ryzen doesn't support RDIMMS etc.. Even before the coming of AI and the bandwidth of performant RAM it would have helped to have this option, and now its even more useful.

PCI-E lanes are even easier to justify. Its pretty astonishing that Ryzen's $800+, high end X870E motherboards advertise how many M.2 drives they can support, but in the small print using more than a couple means some limitation - your (rapidly numerically diminishing, unfortunately) PCI-E slots are going to be dropped back to x8 or x4, some other M.2 slots won't have as many lanes etc. Given the push to move to M.2 drives near completely all needing PCI-E , it seems foolish to require so many compromises, atop not even being able to run your x16 slots both at full speed! I can remember back in the Intel HEDT days there used to be different amounts of CPU lanes depending on which processor you picked up and I always thought AMD could do something like that with Ryzen in order to keep the prices of the lower chips affordable, yet the people buying the 2 CCD chips (and perhaps the 9800X3D?) would unlock additional lanes as they'd be more likely to have need of them.

I know that it would require some overhauls/enhancements to chipsets and on-die controllers etc.. but since then start of Zen 3 or 4 at least it seems that AMD has left a gulf between Ryzen and EPYC that was not really being filled by Threadripper anymore in its new configuration, so they'd be better off continuing expanding Ryzen's use case (what they claimed to do when they brought 2CCD 16 core CPUs to Ryzen etc.). if they aren't going to reorient Threadripper to better serve those needs.
 
It would not be a little reorganisation for the cpu memory and lane controller, it would a different io die on the cpu needed for the top of the line ryzen that support 4 channels... i.,e turning them pretty much into threadrippers (that pretty much the only difference between threadripper and regular ryzen, the cores ccd are the same) and they would need a bigger socket pin count for the higher end cpu part of the line up or you add a lot of cost to all the line up if it is mono iodie/mono socket but just fused out capacity with unused pins.

DDR6 and NVME that use only 2 pci lane (1 even) with PCI 5.0/6.0 would do a lot for capacity a bit like x8 PCI 5.0 can do a lot for gpu, I think a lot of the issue is right now a lack of in the regular customer space of hardware that take advantage of pci 4/5 speed to reduce the amount of lane needed, a 10gbs ethernet adapter in full duplex would fit fine on x1 pcie 5.0 now but we do not see many of them, same for x1/x2 nvme drive, that way enough bandwidth for many use. Could take time hardware made for gen3 will work fine in 4/5 and not the reverse.
 
Last edited:
RanceJustice said:
THat's a reason it seems so strange to me that, when delineating t he Ryzen chipsets from A820, B850, X870, X870E etc... that the highest end ones do not come with the option for quad-channel RAM. I know it would take a little reorganization for a controller capale of it,
Click to expand...

This is some deep misunderstanding. a) all the chipsets are the same silicon, just a different name, that's why they don't do anything different; some of the names mean two chipsets, and the lowend am5 chipset is actually an am4 chipset relabeled. There's also one low end chipset that has parts disabled. b) the chipsets just sit on a pci-e x4 slot from the cpu; memory connects directly to the cpu; the chipset can't add memory channels (unless you did some cxl stuff, but I don't think you want that on an x4 slot); for the dual chipsets, the second chipset uplinks to the first, so everything chipset connected runs through a single x4 link to the cpu. c) more memory channels needs more pins, the pins are already tiny, so you'd need a bigger socket...

I think the way to more i/o is if the chipset x4 goes to pci-e 5/6 and then the chipset aggregates x16 pci-e 3/4 (you could also oversubscribe). Pci-e switches are too expensive, but if they weren't, switches could expand current gen pci-e lanes to twice as many last gen lanes, and have a dual 4x16 board with a cpu that does 5, instead of single x16 or dual x8 regardless of what gen your cards are.
 
I know that they'd need to make actual changes to the socket, chipsets, on-die as mentioned, but I think if they're going to take the time to have all the listed variations (X870E and down) and continual higher prices, they could make those changes - we've seen the problems mounting for the past several generations. I don't think Same thing for the PCI-E lanes, as you say - it would be nice to be able to use bifurcation and bandwidth from higher PCI-E versions to power more lower version devices. Afterall, so many M.2 SSDs are 3.0 and 4.0 versions now (notably those like the 980 / 990 Pro, SN850X that are still high performance) but it isn't like you can just automatically load up twice as many 4.0 drives etc without it attenuating anything else the way it would if you were using 5.0 drives in those M.2 slots.

The changeover from AM4 to AM5 could have resolved some of these problems were they designed for it, but if things aren't changing in terms of Threadripper, then it would be nice if moving forward for the next Ryzen socket. Of course, they could just reorient Threadripper to offer what HEDT used to offer in other regards, but it seems AMD doesn't want to do that so far anyway.
 
Last edited:
RanceJustice said:
I know that they'd need to make actual changes to the socket, chipsets, on-die as mentioned,
Click to expand...
but once you have the big sock and the big on-die... the little 6/8 core cpu price will have all of those in them, there is a very good reason for the big socket to be just for the expensive cpu that will use them, same for the big io die.

IO die on threadripper is giant (388mm, that 50% more silicon than a 9950x on the io controller), socket is quite massive has well:
82WJeouBmYZfJpxQWP2CvY.jpg


even a more limited 4 channels-more pci lane would be a lot of cost to put on the 6-8 cores variant of the line up.

There must be a small socket-small io die CPU, the use case for dual channel and low amount of pci lane like a computer to play game is quite popular.

DDR6, pci 6.0 would make bandwidth quite high for regular people, even if they keep it dual channel and a similar amount of lanes.

RanceJustice said:
Of course, they could just reorient Threadripper to offer what HEDT used to offer in other regards,
Click to expand...
Offer that pretty much all there (lot of talk are made for just 5-6% boost clock difference), high price is the only issue..
 
RanceJustice said:
It would be nice, but at least we'll get 24c. AMD has rightly over the past decade or so broke the barrier that used to be the quad-core limit Intel had for years on mainstream chips. Ryzen coming up to 8c, and then 16c were big steps up in this regard. Unfortunately, they didn't seem to keep up in terms of PCI-E lanes and RAM channels - two factors which, absent "real enthusiast HEDT", are more necessary than ever for AMD's Ryzen platform.

Zen chips benefit significantly from quality RAM - not just speed, buit CL and other factors and having a good EXPO kit led to meanignful performance gain. THat's a reason it seems so strange to me that, when delineating t he Ryzen chipsets from A820, B850, X870, X870E etc... that the highest end ones do not come with the option for quad-channel RAM. I know it would take a little reorganization for a controller capale of it, and users just wanting to stick to dual channel could just populate two sticks the same way that you can use a single channel configuration today, but it would be a nice step forward if they don't intend for Threadripper to be made for enthusiasts, how Ryzen doesn't support RDIMMS etc.. Even before the coming of AI and the bandwidth of performant RAM it would have helped to have this option, and now its even more useful.

PCI-E lanes are even easier to justify. Its pretty astonishing that Ryzen's $800+, high end X870E motherboards advertise how many M.2 drives they can support, but in the small print using more than a couple means some limitation - your (rapidly numerically diminishing, unfortunately) PCI-E slots are going to be dropped back to x8 or x4, some other M.2 slots won't have as many lanes etc. Given the push to move to M.2 drives near completely all needing PCI-E , it seems foolish to require so many compromises, atop not even being able to run your x16 slots both at full speed! I can remember back in the Intel HEDT days there used to be different amounts of CPU lanes depending on which processor you picked up and I always thought AMD could do something like that with Ryzen in order to keep the prices of the lower chips affordable, yet the people buying the 2 CCD chips (and perhaps the 9800X3D?) would unlock additional lanes as they'd be more likely to have need of them.

I know that it would require some overhauls/enhancements to chipsets and on-die controllers etc.. but since then start of Zen 3 or 4 at least it seems that AMD has left a gulf between Ryzen and EPYC that was not really being filled by Threadripper anymore in its new configuration, so they'd be better off continuing expanding Ryzen's use case (what they claimed to do when they brought 2CCD 16 core CPUs to Ryzen etc.). if they aren't going to reorient Threadripper to better serve those needs.
Click to expand...
I love everything here. That would make for an awesome machine. A sort of HEDT-light. :) Maybe a different socket for the future 970e or 1070e chipset.
 
instead of having threadripper having 4 channel-8 channel in them (and a socker size that support it), having them 8 only and Ryzen being the 2 or 4 channels, would lead to a cheapper 4 channels option, but a much more expensive 2 channel option, which seem a bad idea.

People for who dual channel ddr6 is not enough bandwith, will tend to have money to pay, 4 different socket if volume would be big enough for every segment could be better here. (2-4-8-12+ channel)
 
LukeTbk said:
but once you have the big sock and the big on-die... the little 6/8 core cpu price will have all of those in them, there is a very good reason for the big socket to be just for the expensive cpu that will use them, same for the big io die.

IO die on threadripper is giant (388mm, that 50% more silicon than a 9950x on the io controller), socket is quite massive has well:

even a more limited 4 channels-more pci lane would be a lot of cost to put on the 6-8 cores variant of the line up.

There must be a small socket-small io die CPU, the use case for dual channel and low amount of pci lane like a computer to play game is quite popular.

DDR6, pci 6.0 would make bandwidth quite high for regular people, even if they keep it dual channel and a similar amount of lanes
Click to expand...
LukeTbk said:
Offer that pretty much all there (lot of talk are made for just 5-6% boost clock difference), high price is the only issue..
Click to expand...

I think the issue is that it feels like AMD has over-extended the Ryzen lineup, alongside with pushing the Threadripper/TRPro side away from what it used to be as described above (I want to say this was around the transition after X399 and when they brought 16 cores to the Ryzen platform but not much else from what was formerly TR only). I remember how large TR CPUs were and even Intel HEDT Socket 2011-3 (I remember when Asus actually added EXTRA pins to the socket on certain high end boards to make OCs more stable and capable!). Yeah, I grant that not everyone needs some beefy machine above dual channel or with a ton of PCI-E slots and lanes to power them, but clearly many can make use of them and now have two imperfect platforms. Hell, I think with the increasing reliance on "Just M.2 PCI-E SSD , glass fishtank cases with no room for bays or expansion" that even the mid-level gamer is running out of lanes to make use of all their M.2 drives (games getting larger, yet drives above 2TB were expensive even before the AI crunch so they were using multiple 1TB/2TB drives etc) without the lanes being compromised elsewhere. I grant that DDR6 mixed with latest generation PCI-E 6.0 standard would help, but unless they A) actually put a decent amount of lanes on it and B) provide the hardware and firmware support for bifurcation/step down usage so that you can easily multiply those lanes into something usable no matter if its a (now rare) actual physical x16 slot or a M.2 x4, , we'll still have the issues and when SSDs and GPUs start moving up to PCI-E 6.0 standards then it will be even harder. Still, it would be an improvement at least if done right.

I think the problem with Threadripper now isn't just price. Back in the old days both for Intel and AMD if you bought HEDT platforms (X58, X99, X299 , X399 on the AMD side etc) you were getting the best of all worlds. It seems that AMD has ignored the enthusiast mixed use 'high end desktop' side in favor of parallelized MOAR COAR exclusive junior level server workloads exclusively. When you're paying the increasingly high prices, it begins to grate when you're asked to compromise so much. HEDT used to come after server/pro workstation in the Xeon/EPYC side of course, but it often came similarly to or sometimes before the mainstream. Paying more for something that's going to debut 6+ months after the Ryzen version when people are already starting to talk about the next generation isn't great. Atop that, when benchmarks are used for gaming and other tasks on TR last I saw, they come in behind the higher end Ryzen chips the vast majority of the time. While with the 9000 series the clock speeds have improved to be close to Ryzen chips, the lack of 3D VCache availability also leads to performance deficit - a 9950X3D has the same 128mb vcache (configured with much of it on one CCD) as the 9960X / 9970X which is spread among a lot more cores etc. While it varies depending on applicatiion and of course the 24 and 32 core TR have a great lead in highly parallelized tasks, its not a good feeling to pay more than double for the CPU and it not at least perform equally.

In the old days a HEDT CPU not only had the expanded multicore performance, but also did equally or better to the mainstream chips when it came to single/few core performance. That was what you were paying for after all! It would be much easier to accept the higher price if it didn't come with so many asterisks and tradeoffs. I think AMD has spread standard Ryzen too thin over too wide a market and conversely crammed both Threadripper and Threadripper PRO into an increasingly narrow market. It seems a perfect time to reorient the standard Threadripper (if tthey're going to keep Pro at all instead of just folding it into Epyc) to ensure it provides equal or better gaming and other enthusiast use to a 9950X3D2 equivalent, while also having the quad channel RAM, increased assortment of PCI-E lanes, and other features of the platform. It just feels like paying too much for something that has drifted over the years and thus compromises no matter what you choose, instead of how HEDT during the 'old days' directly met the needs of a certain enthusiast demographic with a wide array of usages.
 
Last edited:
RanceJustice said:
I think AMD has spread standard Ryzen too thin over too wide a market and conversely crammed both Threadripper and Threadripper PRO into an increasingly narrow market.
Click to expand...

I mentioned/felt this when 9950X3D2 released. "Segmentation for segmentation's sake".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top