AMD: 3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper in 2019

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
AMD has released a new slide deck for investors shedding light on its launch plans for this year. They include the Ryzen 3000-series CPUs, which are slated for “mid-year,” as well as third-generation Threadripper chips sometime in 2019. The company has also slated its second-generation Ryzen Pro mobile products for notebooks this spring.

AMD’s 2nd Gen EPYC (codenamed Rome) and 3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper processors have a lot in common. EPYC will have eight 7nm Zen 2-based chiplets to provide up to 64 cores and an IO die. We expect the 3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper to be built on the same platform, but we don't expect to see parity on power/core/frequency based on how the first generation Threadripper only offered half the cores of the 1st Gen EPYC. We would be pleasantly surprised if there was core configuration parity!
 
It'll be interesting whether they use the same IO core as Epyc but laser off or not connect the 4 other memory channels for TR4, or a dedicated IO core for Threadripper. I'm guessing they'll use the Epyc IO core due to volume, but they have that flexibility. The photo's showed Epyc's IO core is pretty large, so there should be cost efficiencies with having a separate design if they can amortize the design cost.
 
Geni said:
It'll be interesting whether they use the same IO core as Epyc but laser off or not connect the 4 other memory channels for TR4, or a dedicated IO core for Threadripper. I'm guessing they'll use the Epyc IO core due to volume, but they have that flexibility. The photo's showed Epyc's IO core is pretty large, so there should be cost efficiencies with having a separate design if they can amortize the design cost.
Click to expand...
I wonder if they could repurpose the unused memory channels for chip-chip io, since TR boards don't have that many memory channels. Wouldn't help latency any, but would improve bandwidth if that mattered in anything at that level.
 
Article said:
AMD’s 2nd Gen EPYC (codenamed Rome) and 3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper processors have a lot in common. EPYC will have eight 7nm Zen 2-based chiplets to provide up to 64 cores and an IO die. We expect the 3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper to be built on the same platform, but we don't expect to see parity on power/core/frequency based on how the first generation Threadripper only offered half the cores of the 1st Gen EPYC.
Click to expand...

This makes perfect sense. Massive core counts with lowered frequencies (to fit inside the power envelope) make little sense on the desktop. I'd fully expect fewer cores, but higher clocks instead. That just makes more sense for the markets the Threadripper serves compared to the Epyc. But if you really want the former, you can always just buy an Epyc motherboard and CPU :p
 
Geni said:
It'll be interesting whether they use the same IO core as Epyc but laser off or not connect the 4 other memory channels for TR4, or a dedicated IO core for Threadripper. I'm guessing they'll use the Epyc IO core due to volume, but they have that flexibility. The photo's showed Epyc's IO core is pretty large, so there should be cost efficiencies with having a separate design if they can amortize the design cost.
Click to expand...
Apparently the ryzen 14nm io is different so I'd imagine the TR and epyc will be same. 14nm is an older and well known process now, not that expensive.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
This makes perfect sense. Massive core counts with lowered frequencies (to fit inside the power envelope) make little sense on the desktop. I'd fully expect fewer cores, but higher clocks instead. That just makes more sense for the markets the Threadripper serves compared to the Epyc. But if you really want the former, you can always just buy an Epyc motherboard and CPU :p
Click to expand...

9900K @ 5+ GHz FTW!!! Right?
 
STEM said:
9900K @ 5+ GHz FTW!!! Right?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is a very good chip. I'm hoping that there will be a 8C/16T 3rd gen AMD Zen chip that matches it in per thread performance, as I want to own AMD again.

It's amazing Intel could pull that off on 14nm. Just goes to show that Intel still has the lead on chip layout.

AMD may be catching up, but a large portion of that is due to having the lead on process size due to Intel's 10nm blunder.

AMD had better be wise to this and work furiously on incremental layout improvements like Intel has for the last 15 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top