AMD Ryzen 5 5600 review
PowerColor RX 6650 XT Hellhound White review
FSP Hydro PTM Pro (1200W PSU) review
ASUS ROG Radeon RX 6750 XT STRIX review
AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 - preview
Sapphire Radeon RX 6650 XT Nitro+ review
Sapphire Radeon RX 6950 XT Sapphire Nitro+ Pure review
Sapphire Radeon RX 6750 XT Nitro+ review
MSI Radeon RX 6950 XT Gaming X TRIO review
MSI Radeon RX 6750 XT Gaming X TRIO review
AMD Ryzen 14nm Wafer Yields Pass 80% - Threadripper CPUs on track
Good news for and from AMD, the yields for fabbing AMD Ryzen processors seem to be reaching strong values and are reaching numbers passing 80% for fully the functional 8-core parts. Ryzen is fabbed using a 14nm FinFet process. That fabrication node has been in use and refined for over a year now.
Since the Zen processor dies aren't that massive, that helps in wafer yields. In the end, high yields are good for end-users as on the long run it might bring prices down. Simply put higher yields bring the cost to produce a processor down. Meaning in the end with proper volume and market availability, you might see the cost per chip go down. That's good news for AMD alright.
With 14nm FinFET yields this high, the AMD threadripper series processors do make more sense as here as well, these are the same dies doubled up. the 16-core and 32-threaded monster of a processor series will be detailed more during Computex. AMD in a conference call today also verified to us that Treadripper is on track for this summer. The Summer ends in September, so let's make a wild assumption that the actual release could be in an August time-frame.
Also in other news, Threadripper is not a codename as was mentioned in the same conference call, this actually will be the brand name for the 16, 14 and 12 core parts from AMD. The codename remains to be whitehaven. This means that it will not be called a Ryzen 9 series processor (but hey who knows as that could change right?). The Whitehaven platform should include support for quad-channel DDR4 memory support and offer additional PCIe lanes. Some unconfirmed additional rumors on these processors can be read up here.
- Expected to feature up to 16 cores and 32 threads
- All new high end desktop platform that will include more memory and I/O bandwidth than the current AM4 platform
- Targeted at the world’s fastest ultra premium desktop and workstation systems
- Coming in Summer 2017
Dang you guys, we have a wild Summer loaded with new technology ahead of us !
| Ryzen Threadripper | Cores/threads | Clock/boost | Tdp | Memory | Pci-e-lanes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998X | 16/32 | 3,5/3,9GHz | 155W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1998 | 16/32 | 3,2/3,6GHz | 155W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1977X | 14/28 | 3,5/4,0GHz | 155W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1977 | 14/28 | 3,2/3,7GHz | 140W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1976X | 12/24 | 3,6/4,1GHz | 125W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1956X | 12/24 | 3,2/3,8GHz | 125W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1956 | 12/24 | 3,0/3,7GHz | 125W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1955X | 10/20 | 3,6/4,0GHz | 125W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
| 1955 | 10/20 | 3,1/3,7GHz | 125W | Quad Channel DDR4 | 44 |
Originally SP3r2 4094-pin socket was developed for the AMD Naples series processor, but AMD did a 180 and is introducing it also as high-end desktop platform series processors and chipsets. Whitehaven will bring quad-channel towards the processor series and the most high-end process would get a 155W TDP, 125W for the 10 core parts.
Review: AMD Ryzen 5 1600 processor - just fantastic value - 05/16/2017 08:51 AM
Is this perhaps the best value Ryzen processor available on the market? We test and benchmark the six-core Ryzen 5 1600 (without the X). The 1600 will be tested and overclocked to see how much value y...
New Microcode to further enhance AMD Ryzen memory compatibility - 05/07/2017 03:10 PM
AMD will be releasing a new AGESA microcode update this month, this is now being worked on bt the motherboard manufacturers. The new microcode (which is located in your BIOS) will further enhance memo...
AMD Ryzen R5 1600X takes down 6 core global first places on launch day - 04/11/2017 03:54 PM
German overclocker Der8auer (and a bit of a buddy of ours) managed to push the Ryzen R5 1600X to 5906 MHz and also break 6 Core Global world records with the CPUs at 5446 MHz with LN2 tweaking....
AMD Ryzen Master Software v1.0.1 Update To Fix CPU temperature Reporting - 04/08/2017 07:36 PM
A new update (version 1.0.1) of AMD Ryzen Master overclocking utility is now detecting the AMD Ryzen CPU temperatures correctly when compared to the previous version. Some have been reportin some prob...
ASRock Puts AMD Ryzen 3 1200 Processor Details Online - 04/05/2017 08:21 AM
In what only can be described as an whoops, ASRock in their CPU support list makes mention of the entry-level AMD Ryzen 3 1200 Processor. The processor would get a 3100 MHz base-clock and gets a 65W ...
Chillin
Senior Member
Posts: 6814
Joined: 2006-01-18
Senior Member
Posts: 6814
Joined: 2006-01-18
#5433880 Posted on: 05/20/2017 10:13 AM
Why not release single CCX quad core CPUs with proper clock speeds? The problem with that company is that they try to awe people instead of trying to understand the market's needs, and that's why they screw it all up every time.
They can't release mainstream Vega because HBM memory supply is quite inadequate for mainstream Vega, so they delay it. They could've used a 384bit wide memory bus for Vega, which would result in 384 GB/s of memory bandwidth when coupled with Samsung's GDDR5 memory. If their delta color compression improvements claims are true, then that all they would've needed to release a competitive on par or faster than the GTX1080.
Ryzen blows for gaming because they opted to impress people with cores instead of releasing proper quad core CPUs at high clock speeds, without all that cross-CCX latency that's causing slow L3 cache access and slow thread migration across CCXs.
Wow, you have no idea what you're talking about...
For the first time in many years, I'm actually agreeing with AMDs approach for the most part and the fact that the may be a chance to return them to (slight) profitability.
Why not release single CCX quad core CPUs with proper clock speeds? The problem with that company is that they try to awe people instead of trying to understand the market's needs, and that's why they screw it all up every time.
They can't release mainstream Vega because HBM memory supply is quite inadequate for mainstream Vega, so they delay it. They could've used a 384bit wide memory bus for Vega, which would result in 384 GB/s of memory bandwidth when coupled with Samsung's GDDR5 memory. If their delta color compression improvements claims are true, then that all they would've needed to release a competitive on par or faster than the GTX1080.
Ryzen blows for gaming because they opted to impress people with cores instead of releasing proper quad core CPUs at high clock speeds, without all that cross-CCX latency that's causing slow L3 cache access and slow thread migration across CCXs.
Wow, you have no idea what you're talking about...
For the first time in many years, I'm actually agreeing with AMDs approach for the most part and the fact that the may be a chance to return them to (slight) profitability.
Anarion
Senior Member
Posts: 13605
Joined: 2005-08-13
Senior Member
Posts: 13605
Joined: 2005-08-13
#5433891 Posted on: 05/20/2017 10:50 AM
Ohhhh do i love it when people claim, as though it is fact, that something "can't" happen, based off of their supposed super knowledge. It's always great, because when they are proven wrong, they pretend they never said it.
Oh hey look, it's this guy here to chime in some information that has already been stated and discussed to death and replied to repeatedly through the forums, yay!
That's according to The Stilt who definitely knows more than any of us here.
You missed one important thing. Ryzen cores can be disabled via BIOS in any combination.
If BIOS can do it, laser can as well...
Any combination? No...
It isn't possible or just not very handy for compilers?
But why not (4+4)+(3+3) for the 14 core version, and (3+3)+(2+2) for the 10 core?
That's because each Zeppeling die must have matching core & cache configuration. According to The Stilt. Makes sense, since 5 and 7 core options aren't possible for Zeppelin (either one CCX is off completely or they are matching).
Also in case it isn't obvious, Threadripper is two Zeppelin dies. EPYC is four.
Ohhhh do i love it when people claim, as though it is fact, that something "can't" happen, based off of their supposed super knowledge. It's always great, because when they are proven wrong, they pretend they never said it.
Oh hey look, it's this guy here to chime in some information that has already been stated and discussed to death and replied to repeatedly through the forums, yay!
That's according to The Stilt who definitely knows more than any of us here.
You missed one important thing. Ryzen cores can be disabled via BIOS in any combination.
If BIOS can do it, laser can as well...
Any combination? No...
It isn't possible or just not very handy for compilers?
But why not (4+4)+(3+3) for the 14 core version, and (3+3)+(2+2) for the 10 core?
That's because each Zeppeling die must have matching core & cache configuration. According to The Stilt. Makes sense, since 5 and 7 core options aren't possible for Zeppelin (either one CCX is off completely or they are matching).
Also in case it isn't obvious, Threadripper is two Zeppelin dies. EPYC is four.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 2397
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 2397
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5433893 Posted on: 05/20/2017 10:52 AM
so far i had the idea that amd produces a wafer with ccx's and then stitching 2 together to make the 8 cores and then the less likely to be healthy stitching em up to make 4 and 6 core although that is my own speculation so for 12 core and 10 i thought they will use 3 ccx ...on the other hand i thought they will use just 1 ccx for quad cores and i was wrong so there is that ....now about clock speeds the way they stitch em together seems like once again the overclock will be again 3.9-4.0ghz as far as you have the cooling capacity.
anyway we will see when those babies come out
with 80% yields it sounds to me like the ccxs that can not run with full features might be less than the demand ...so they might be laser-cutting healthy ccxs to meet the demand of the lower models at least that is what my logic says
so far i had the idea that amd produces a wafer with ccx's and then stitching 2 together to make the 8 cores and then the less likely to be healthy stitching em up to make 4 and 6 core although that is my own speculation so for 12 core and 10 i thought they will use 3 ccx ...on the other hand i thought they will use just 1 ccx for quad cores and i was wrong so there is that ....now about clock speeds the way they stitch em together seems like once again the overclock will be again 3.9-4.0ghz as far as you have the cooling capacity.
anyway we will see when those babies come out
with 80% yields it sounds to me like the ccxs that can not run with full features might be less than the demand ...so they might be laser-cutting healthy ccxs to meet the demand of the lower models at least that is what my logic says
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 8286
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 8286
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5433897 Posted on: 05/20/2017 11:48 AM
That's according to The Stilt who definitely knows more than any of us here.
And is according to someone not part of AMD. So no, they don't know what they are talking about.
Now, if someone who actually helped develop Ryzen were to state this, sure, no reason not to believe it. But that's not what is happening, now is it...
No point is saying "that can't happen" when you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and should rather wait and see.
Before ryzen was released, people were saying 6 core processors wouldn't happen either, because it'd be 4, 8, 12, 16, etc.
The earth was flat, you couldn't go faster then the speed of sound and only nine planets exist. All facts that people decided to state because they either did not know what they were talking about, could not do it or were simply blind. But hey lets continue this tradition of saying what is or isn't possible about stuff we know thing about, that's cool too.
That's according to The Stilt who definitely knows more than any of us here.
And is according to someone not part of AMD. So no, they don't know what they are talking about.
Now, if someone who actually helped develop Ryzen were to state this, sure, no reason not to believe it. But that's not what is happening, now is it...
No point is saying "that can't happen" when you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and should rather wait and see.
Before ryzen was released, people were saying 6 core processors wouldn't happen either, because it'd be 4, 8, 12, 16, etc.
The earth was flat, you couldn't go faster then the speed of sound and only nine planets exist. All facts that people decided to state because they either did not know what they were talking about, could not do it or were simply blind. But hey lets continue this tradition of saying what is or isn't possible about stuff we know thing about, that's cool too.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20
Considering number of PCIe lanes, best guess is that it has 2 new (different from regular Ryzen 7) 8-core dies connected.
Image shows 4, but that may be 32 core version or something else entirely.