DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,340
AdoredTV:
Take this with as much salt as you like. It does seem semi-plausible though.
Take this with as much salt as you like. It does seem semi-plausible though.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
not giving it a click. theres not going to be a 16 core over 5ghz chip.
not giving it a click. theres not going to be a 16 core over 5ghz chip.
Not really I'm not looking forward to having to water cool that cpu at 5ghz.We all want 16 cores 32 threads with a (even a single core) speed of 5ghz. But it'll never happen. I'd upgrade at least 3 of my machines if this was true.
Not really I'm not looking forward to having to water cool that cpu at 5ghz.
Yeah the TDP part is rather unsettling. All the time the people were beating the crap out of AMD for not being power efficientVideo says 16 core 4.3 base, 5.1 GHz max single core turbo on halo ($500 135 watt TDP) part. Also, will be three chips. One I/O die, and two 8 core chiplets.
Yeah the TDP part is rather unsettling. All the time the people were beating the crap out of AMD for not being power efficient. The AMD forums around the world were hell with those smart Intel people scolding that it uses to much power.
So don't buy it? The rest of us will just buy adequate cooling...
Even bigger question: what is the utility of sixteen cores without significantly increased memory bandwidth?
At some point, which is perhaps testable, the workloads that will put sixteen cores to good use will be limited by bandwidth.
Even bigger question: what is the utility of sixteen cores without significantly increased memory bandwidth?
At some point, which is perhaps testable, the workloads that will put sixteen cores to good use will be limited by bandwidth.
And it's a DROP IN REPLACMENT with a bios update.
It was interesting that Adored suggests the 6c, 8c, and 12c Zen 2 will drop in to X370 and X470. But 16c will only work on X570, due to increased Threadripper-like power requirements.
How many tests are there out there where the quad channel RAM and the added bandwidth makes very little difference in many applications?
Realistically, 16C is overkill for mainstream use (right now anyway), but if AMD has a 8C/16T part for $229 and Intels is $490+ and they are within 10% of each other. There's really no reason to spend the extra for Intel.
...and your off-topic distraction reveals your intent.
Well, supposedly zen 2 has double the L3 cache, so that will help alleviate the bandwidth issues (higher hit rate, and possibly higher bandwidth).
But they will still need to bump the officially supported DDR4 clock to not starve the chips. 'I'm pretty sure they could do 3200 without gouging people for the memory (2700x supports 2933 in stock mode).
So comparing CPU's between brands is off topic? That doesn't really make much sense when discussing CPU's.
Which is strange because if you load up an all core OC, you're probably way beyond the 135W that the 16C is at already and current boards handle it. It might come down to a case by case basis with each board where higher end ones get support, and lower end ones don't.
"Hey look at this off-topic thing, just to prove my bias and that I'm more right!"
Sorry, yeah, we're not comparing brands, we're talking about high core-count CPUs on a consumer socket, and here you going on about low core-count CPUs as a distraction.
Welcome to the lose/lose conundrum of forward compatibility![]()
You're just being ridiculous. The video had CPU's all over the spectrum and the topic is "New Zen 2 Leak" which includes everything from the 3300 to the 3850X. The 8C/16T part is in there. As you said, not everyone needs a 16C part, so it's clearly relevant. I don't understand why a chip that performs similar like the $490 Intel part at half price is a bad thing for consumers. I don't give a shit about Intel or AMD. I like performance per dollar.
Well, I mean I like their version of it compared to Intel's (admittedly as a bitter Z270 chipset owner).
That'll help a little bit, but hopefully they have faster memory support planned for those that would actually want to use those sixteen cores.
should be enough to cover most processing loads
Seems plausible on the leak and Adored TV tends to be pretty accurate.
Ryzen 3000 Series is literally a miniature version of Rome.
It contains two chiplets and 1/4 I/O die.
Alternatively, one of the chiplet can be replaced with an iGPU
So AMD is launching 7 CPU's in 4 weeks and the only leak we have is this one? Nothing on SiS or any other CPU bench software? No mobo/chipset leaks?
And despite the other X570 leak showing Computex?
"Take it with a grain of salt" = I'm talking out of my ass for easy clickbait.
I will say if this is accurate my Intel parts are going on Ebay day one. Won't even bother waiting 6+ months for Ice Lake.
If this leak is true (IF), it's what I've been saying since the Rome reveal. It would make a lot of sense. Make one chiplet die. Bin and segment. Make two i/o dies, a big one for Epyc & TR, and a small one for AM4. Make AM4 use two chiplets OR one chiplet and one GPU. Cheap way to salvage semi-shitty GPU dies, too.
For 9th gen HEDT Intel just soldered the IHS, slightly more cache, and more Lanes on the same architecture so IPC change. Intel is so lame.
If Zen 2 hits 5.0ghz on 8, 12, or 16 cores at those price points then intel is in trouble.
not giving it a click. theres not going to be a 16 core over 5ghz chip.
Which is strange because if you load up an all core OC, you're probably way beyond the 135W that the 16C is at already and current boards handle it. It might come down to a case by case basis with each board where higher end ones get support, and lower end ones don't.