EnGenius ECS2512FP. 8-port 2.5G Cloud Switch review
Deepcool CG560 chassis review
Fractal Design Torrent Black RGB TG review
Core i9 12900K DDR4 3600 vs DDR5 5200 performance review
Corsair H150i Elite LCD review
Seasonic Syncro Q704 chassis + Connect PSU review
Fractal Design Ion+ 2 Platinum 860W PSU Review
Crucial P5 Plus PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe review
Fractal Design Lumen S28 RGB review (LCS)
WD Red SN700 NVMe SSD review
AMD Ryzen Threadripper actually has 32-cores under that heatspreader
So one thing I have been thinking about for a while now is that AMDs server platform EPYC offers 32-core processors. Realistically it would not make much sense to create separate and create alternate SKUs for the consumer given AMDs recent history (4 core procs are really 8-core parts).
Well, Roman Hartung aka Der8auer just confirmed some suspicions I had in a video. He got his hands on an engineering sample Ryzen Threadripper processor, the brave man that he is delidded it (while knowing the dies are soldered to the heatspreader) and noticed four dies under there. He also killed the Threadripper that way :( That would be 8-cores per die folks! And that means in the future Threadripper could even scale upwards to 32-cores and 64-threads LOL.
Count them - 4 dies - 8 CCXes each holding 4 cores
We are a bit puzzled as to how things are configured for the to be released 16-core Threadripper. Common sense dictates that two dies would be disabled, then again there could be four dies active with 2 disabled cores per CCX. But ergo, Threadripper seems to be the same part that is the 32-core EPYC. And that opens up so many question like is that 1 DRAM channel per die ? :) Likely though the processors are binned based on yiels. During fabrication one core or a die might not be properly functioning, you disable that die and if you have two dies left 100% working, you get your 16-core part. But with yields always getting better over time, i would not be surprized to see Threadripper processors in the future with more than 16 cores activated.
Check the video to get that smile on your face.
Review: AMD Ryzen 3 1200 and 1300X - Entry Level Going Quad Core - 07/27/2017 03:00 PM
Entry level processors, going quad-core. Yes AMD is at it again with their Ryzen 3 series processors, in this review we test their Ryzen 3 1200 and 1300X. That means you can gain a significant number ...
AMD Ryzen Threadripper might get AIO LCS Liquid cooling bundled - 07/17/2017 03:39 PM
Granted, it is a bit of a ling shot to call this news-item accurate. but on the web right now rumors are surfacing that the new Threadripper processor, which have a 180W TDP, will get a liquid cooling...
AMD Ryzen Threadripper procs will offer a lot of bang for buck - 07/13/2017 06:00 PM
Earlier today AMD announced the two launch Ryzen Threadripper processor, the 12c/24t 1920X and 16c/32t 1950X. The processors, despite its enthusiast price level, are going to offer terrific value. And...
ASUS Releases Prime A320M-E - AMD Ryzen A320 Motherboard - 07/04/2017 08:37 AM
Cute, tiny and it should be affordable. ASUS just released its Prime A320M-E, this is a AMD A320 chipset based motherboard for Ryzen processors (Socket AM4)....
AMD Ryzen DDR4 Speed barrier broken by overclocker newlife to DDR4-4079.2 - 07/03/2017 07:54 AM
AMD Ryzen DDR4 Speed barrier broken by Australian overclocker newlife bringing it to DDR4-4079.2Mhz ! Recent AGESA updates have given motherboard vendors the chance to pump out BIOS updates that of...
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 6203
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 6203
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5456272 Posted on: 07/27/2017 07:50 PM
Are they though? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I never saw any evidence of how exactly AMD disables the cores. For all we know a 1400 could have 1 core enabled on once CCX and 3 enabled on the other. Seems to me having symmetry would be too expensive.
Yes, if you are right about the symmetry then I am inclined to agree. Seems a bit awkward, going from 8 cores to 12.
I figure anything above 16 cores will be in the Epyc range.
We've seen this before with the Ryzen 5, where cores are disabled in symmetric pairs.
Are they though? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I never saw any evidence of how exactly AMD disables the cores. For all we know a 1400 could have 1 core enabled on once CCX and 3 enabled on the other. Seems to me having symmetry would be too expensive.
Also, if they disable cores symmetrically, I doubt that we will see a 10 or 14 core Threadripper, although it's possible that they'll release a 24-core or 32-core model in the future (TDP permitting).
Yes, if you are right about the symmetry then I am inclined to agree. Seems a bit awkward, going from 8 cores to 12.
I figure anything above 16 cores will be in the Epyc range.
RooiKreef
Senior Member
Posts: 410
Joined: 2016-06-08
Senior Member
Posts: 410
Joined: 2016-06-08
#5456274 Posted on: 07/27/2017 07:54 PM
Oh my this is very interesting. Hopefully the motherboard manufacturers will launch a BIOS update on the motherboards to unlock these cores. Sort of how the old Phenom CPU cores could get unlocked. If that is the case, Intel will have to seriously reconsider what they bring out next.
Oh my this is very interesting. Hopefully the motherboard manufacturers will launch a BIOS update on the motherboards to unlock these cores. Sort of how the old Phenom CPU cores could get unlocked. If that is the case, Intel will have to seriously reconsider what they bring out next.
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5456276 Posted on: 07/27/2017 07:58 PM
Are they though? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I never saw any evidence of how exactly AMD disables the cores. For all we know a 1400 could have 1 core enabled on once CCX and 3 enabled on the other. Seems to me having symmetry would be too expensive.
Yes, if you are right about the symmetry then I am inclined to agree. Seems a bit awkward, going from 8 cores to 12.
I figure anything above 16 cores will be in the Epyc range.
Actually, read a bit more into it and it seems that AMD is disabling two of the dies for Threadripper, as opposed to disabling cores on each die. This changes the equation dramatically so I'm not sure what to think, although it makes 24 and 32 core TR even more likely. Hopefully there will be more analysis on this over the coming days.
Are they though? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I never saw any evidence of how exactly AMD disables the cores. For all we know a 1400 could have 1 core enabled on once CCX and 3 enabled on the other. Seems to me having symmetry would be too expensive.
Yes, if you are right about the symmetry then I am inclined to agree. Seems a bit awkward, going from 8 cores to 12.
I figure anything above 16 cores will be in the Epyc range.
Actually, read a bit more into it and it seems that AMD is disabling two of the dies for Threadripper, as opposed to disabling cores on each die. This changes the equation dramatically so I'm not sure what to think, although it makes 24 and 32 core TR even more likely. Hopefully there will be more analysis on this over the coming days.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9793
Joined: 2011-09-21
Senior Member
Posts: 9793
Joined: 2011-09-21
#5456279 Posted on: 07/27/2017 08:02 PM
Are they though? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I never saw any evidence of how exactly AMD disables the cores. For all we know a 1400 could have 1 core enabled on once CCX and 3 enabled on the other. Seems to me having symmetry would be too expensive.
Yes, if you are right about the symmetry then I am inclined to agree. Seems a bit awkward, going from 8 cores to 12.
I figure anything above 16 cores will be in the Epyc range.
The way they have been showing these it makes sense what he is saying. It also from a cost standpoint makes total sense. It allows AMD to use almost every bit of silicon that comes from a wafer. If they have to be semetrical having only one CCX per zeppelin (die) active is the only way you can get a 12 core. It still leaves the door open for a 8 core TR. Also as he stated it also lets AMD one up Intel on core count quite easily without any retooling.
Are they though? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I never saw any evidence of how exactly AMD disables the cores. For all we know a 1400 could have 1 core enabled on once CCX and 3 enabled on the other. Seems to me having symmetry would be too expensive.
Yes, if you are right about the symmetry then I am inclined to agree. Seems a bit awkward, going from 8 cores to 12.
I figure anything above 16 cores will be in the Epyc range.
The way they have been showing these it makes sense what he is saying. It also from a cost standpoint makes total sense. It allows AMD to use almost every bit of silicon that comes from a wafer. If they have to be semetrical having only one CCX per zeppelin (die) active is the only way you can get a 12 core. It still leaves the door open for a 8 core TR. Also as he stated it also lets AMD one up Intel on core count quite easily without any retooling.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
We've seen this before with the Ryzen 5, where cores are disabled in symmetric pairs. I think Threadripper pairs four 8-core dies with half the cores disabled - so perfect dies are packaged together and sold as EPYC while the imperfect dies are packaged together and sold as Ryzen Threadripper. This makes sense, as HEDT is a niche market, so wouldn't make sense for AMD to dedicate an entire new production line for it.
Also, if they disable cores symmetrically, I doubt that we will see a 10 or 14 core Threadripper, although it's possible that they'll release a 24-core or 32-core model in the future (TDP permitting).