Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by _mockingbird, Sep 13, 2018.
will any zen2 work in x470 boards?
They're supposed to (x370, etc, too), but I guess we wont really know until they're close to release.
truly makes me wonder how quickly them intel 9xxx will degrade or suffer speed degradation from chasing fastest clocks possible and likely pushing even more raw power through their chip that compared to "older" chips are built on thinner pcb layers and/or likely are not using cream of the crop for the TIM/Solder.
There is always a price, at least AMD played it much more conservatively IMO where they generally seem to monitor power/temps etc much more constantly (besides some motherboards dumping crap loads of raw wattage above and beyond what is actually needed, course it could just be bad sensors not reporting things 100% accurate which is highly likely)
If Zen 2 (I really wish AMD would have just called them all Ryzen followed by model number instead of adding Ryzen 2nd generation (Ryzen+) and Ryzen 2 (which should have been called 2nd generation) etc...keep it simple stupids ^.^
either way, lets just say they are base clock of 4Ghz+ and boost/turbo of whatever but just like Ryzen 2600 etc clock up higher more frequently on as many cores as possible, then if they do the same thing but even more cores can hit max turbo more often but stick within TDP numbers likely it will be quite the fast chips....I am also personally hoping for something like a Gammaxx 300/400 Tower style cooler vs a top down style so it more easily vents the heat instead of blowing it all over the place ^.^
if they do like they did with 300 series to 400 series motherboards then likely it will just require updates, most of the 400 series are "overbuilt" so they should more easily support Ryzen 2 (7nm) than 300 supported Ryzen+ (12nm)
Likely the only issue I personally see is if they change the memory types, add more pci-e lanes or extra power phases etc that 300 or 400 series boards do not support...the APU ones specifically seemed to have a bit more issues for back compatibility or forwards (depending on way you want to word it)...they seemed to be able to "drop right in" for the 400 series but many issues using the 2xxxg chips in 300 series boards...hopefully they get that side sorted out before they release things and have even better drop and use support without requiring boot-kits and the like.
Time will tell, but, in theory AM4, is AM4, is AM4, so if anything it will just be a "simple" BIOS/Agesa update
The motherboard used is not a retail product.
It is a custom motherboard with an AMD logo.
The Zen team is being awfully secretive, that's for sure.
How you know so much? lol Are you employed with RTG? Or just have close friends that work with them
"anonymous source close to people who know how RTG thinks"
_mockingbird is Lisa Su!
Still trying to figure out the relation between 'RTG' and 'Zen2'.
Whoa this was perfect! Someone figured it was a visual learner!
I hope this is a case of a 12 core (2x6 core CCX) model with some defective cores scaling down to 8 or something.
Yes, AMD could get near Intel in IPC and clockspeed with this run, but I don't see them exceeding it. Not yet. I think they still need core count advantage.
But what the hell do I know? I could be totally off base.
They might approach Skylake, but that catch-up only lasts until Intel sorts volume 10nm.
I have explained this already.
The Zen team brought the processor over so that the RTG teams can make changes to the video card's drivers that make them work better with the processor.
You have to wonder if AMD sent a sample to NVIDIA.
I would say probably not, but I guess it's not out of the realm of possibility.
NVIDIA doesn't make x86 processors, so it's not a competitor.
The majority of people buying AMD processors are also buying NVIDIA video cards.
It would be in AMD's best interest to make sure its processors work well with NVIDIA's drivers.
Yeah, but it would seem a bit early to send them a sample yet. AMD also has their APUs to worry about, so it makes sense to send a sample over to RTG early.
We're assuming 10nm does something to increase performance. The last 2 process shrinks brought harder clock gains, the only benefits were 1; cheaper, 2; more space on wafers for shit like moar cores etc, and 3; less power. Clock speeds have been a challenge.
its possible from a performance standpoint that 10nm is actually worse, even when its all said and done and being shoved down our throats.
I'm actually not, I'm assuming that Intel has a new arch ready that's been waiting for 10nm.
They do (cannon lake), and fwiu it's even shipping in low volume, they just don't have any desktop chips out yet and are having trouble with yields.
This is still a Skylake core, so far as I know; had 10nm been even close to on time, we'd be on the next arch.
Thats putting it mildly. 10nm for the desktop is still a year out or longer for Intel and now their 14nm line is back logged and they are going to use TSMC for more production. To be honest this is the worse I have seen Intel perform in a long time. I think Zen 2 will likely outperform current Intel chips if they can get the frequency up just a bit.
If Intel managed to get its 10nm to even remotely acceptable yield, the first 10nm products out the door would have small dies (i.e. U-series laptop processors).
I highly doubt that 8-core desktop processors would be one of the first 10nm products out the door.
Kind-of off topic, but seriously, as if we're actually concerned with power consumption here, I would have no problem if we just took 14nm to AM3+ land with 250W processors @ 7.9 GHZ, Sell us low power shit when you get it sorted in the mean time, give us the ghz.
Power becomes an issue when you try to extract Max performance from as many cores as possible. Intel is learning that now
That's the million dollar question- Zen's IPC is a bit behind, but I don't doubt for a second that AMD hasn't found architectural changes big and small for Zen2 that can help address that and get them at least Skylake parity per clock. And if they can push the clockspeeds just a tad more at scale, they're looking at the potential to outcompete Intel at every mainstream and most commercial levels. Only thing I'd hold reservation for would be stuff that's either super-amenable to Intel's current arch, or stuff that abuses AVX512.
The other side of the coin, and perhaps just as important, is to get task efficiency up across their lineup while maintaining per-core effectiveness. They're already more or less there for most desktop and server loads, but scaling Zen down to ultrabook and lower power envelopes while keeping the heat down and performance up would be a really big win, especially if they're willing to do some cache magic to get their GPU cores well-fed.
Had 10nm gone 'according to plan', we'd already have efficient eight-core CPUs from Intel. We'd have em in sub-DTR laptops, and I bet I'd have a hex-core in my ultrabook. Intel's CEO has already paid for this, and I hope that they get back on track.
woulda coulda shoulda
Lets get back to the interesting talk on Zen2
I do wonder if Zen2 will be performance bound to memory speed in the same way Zen1 is. Maybe it'll work with 4200 ram and be faster? If the engineering sample is already working at 3600.
I feel like infinity fabric, while being a super slick implementation, is Zens problem. If the architecture could run that bus independently.
Exciting times. I do wish they would make a good APU though. 2400g was soo close, but not quite there.
i'm hoping the move to 7nm vega will allow them to do more things like that chinese media center APU they recently announced/released.
Ive got my 2950x so I will be excited to get a 3950x or whatever they are called.
Zen 2 cores on my x399 board .... oh its so lovely to not have to change my motherboard next generation.
What CPU+GPU combo would a 2400g replace? I am running a i3-4170 with Intel Graphics, so let's say I go out and get one of those instead of a GPU for my current system, what would it compare to?
like a GT-1030 i think
There's not much to compare to- any GPU that's more than just a chip to push out a signal is going to smoke either iGPU.
On the flip side, both are capable of running many popular MODA and other low-weight games, and the 2400G with both a bit more GPU bite and eight threads should put forward decent performance should a discrete GPU not be in the cards.
Even if Zen 2 isn't as fast as the 9900k, it's still going to be priced cheaper seeing as the 9900k is looking like a $480 MSRP. WORST case for AMD you're looking at 90% performance for 70% of the money.
its about there
This really, really depends on the IPC gains in common use cases they can pull out and whether they can boost clockspeeds at the same time. Not that I'm claiming that it's impossible, quite the contrary, I think they can do it given that Zen+ appears to leave some performance on the table that could be further tuned out.
90% would mean a 10% IPC jump and at least a 10% clock jump from Zen+. They pull that off, and perhaps banish some of the other limitations like reliance on boutique memory for best performance as well as overclocking of the uncore, and they'll make quite a bit of headroom especially if they keep their current pricing trend.
I haven't had anywhere near as many issues with memory compatibility recently as I used to with my launch 1700. Even the pretty generic 3000 mhz cas 16 stuff runs rated timings and speeds with zen+ for the most part. If they get to the point where it is plug-and-play like Intel with the next-gen that's a win for them. From my experience it seems like they are almost there.