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 SN500 NVMe SSD review
Core i9 12900K processor 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: 6202
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 6202
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5456281 Posted on: 07/27/2017 08:16 PM
On products this high-end, I wouldn't keep my hopes up. Back in the days of unlockable AM3 CPUs (particularly the triple cores), many of them had disabled cores simply to keep up with demand; apparently it was more profitable to disable a core or 2 than it was to release a quad core that wouldn't be bought. But I have a feeling supply and demand isn't going to be an issue for TR, and the complexity of it means whatever cores they disable were disabled because they're faulty - the CCXs are otherwise too expensive.
That actually makes a lot more sense, seeing as TR has half the PCIe lanes (though what doesn't make sense is it still has quad channel memory). This ought to make for some very strange thermals. Imagine seeing one part of the CPU being 20 degrees cooler than the other.
I still don't think we're going to see more than 16 cores in TR, but, this does open doors for 10 and 14 core variants, and maybe 8 cores.
But if dies are symmetrical, that would be more expensive and more wasteful. Consider the 1400 again: you can get 4 working cores whether the arrangement is 2+2 or 1+3 or 3+1. For argument's sake, let's say there is an equal probability that any of these arrangements could be done (due to faulty transistors in the disabled cores). What that means is if AMD wants to build a quad core but are restricted by symmetry, 2/3 of their options cannot be used. That seems pretty wasteful, especially once you start getting toward higher core counts.
EDIT:
Actually it wouldn't be 2/3 of unusable options. Since each CCX has 4 cores, that means there are 6 total combinations (per CCX) of 2+2, but 4 for 1+3 and another 4 for 3+1. That still makes for a lot of wasted silicon.
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.
On products this high-end, I wouldn't keep my hopes up. Back in the days of unlockable AM3 CPUs (particularly the triple cores), many of them had disabled cores simply to keep up with demand; apparently it was more profitable to disable a core or 2 than it was to release a quad core that wouldn't be bought. But I have a feeling supply and demand isn't going to be an issue for TR, and the complexity of it means whatever cores they disable were disabled because they're faulty - the CCXs are otherwise too expensive.
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.
That actually makes a lot more sense, seeing as TR has half the PCIe lanes (though what doesn't make sense is it still has quad channel memory). This ought to make for some very strange thermals. Imagine seeing one part of the CPU being 20 degrees cooler than the other.
I still don't think we're going to see more than 16 cores in TR, but, this does open doors for 10 and 14 core variants, and maybe 8 cores.
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.
But if dies are symmetrical, that would be more expensive and more wasteful. Consider the 1400 again: you can get 4 working cores whether the arrangement is 2+2 or 1+3 or 3+1. For argument's sake, let's say there is an equal probability that any of these arrangements could be done (due to faulty transistors in the disabled cores). What that means is if AMD wants to build a quad core but are restricted by symmetry, 2/3 of their options cannot be used. That seems pretty wasteful, especially once you start getting toward higher core counts.
EDIT:
Actually it wouldn't be 2/3 of unusable options. Since each CCX has 4 cores, that means there are 6 total combinations (per CCX) of 2+2, but 4 for 1+3 and another 4 for 3+1. That still makes for a lot of wasted silicon.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9793
Joined: 2011-09-21
Senior Member
Posts: 9793
Joined: 2011-09-21
#5456283 Posted on: 07/27/2017 08:31 PM
It's only wasted silicon if those disable parts are perfect otherwise it's a way to ensure you use as much o the yields as possible.
Remember Ryzen is manufactured as 4 core CCX's and "glued together".We assume they are required to be in two CCX packages. So you can basically always pair two perfect cores with two perfect cores.
It's only wasted silicon if those disable parts are perfect otherwise it's a way to ensure you use as much o the yields as possible.
Remember Ryzen is manufactured as 4 core CCX's and "glued together".We assume they are required to be in two CCX packages. So you can basically always pair two perfect cores with two perfect cores.
MorganX
Senior Member
Posts: 132
Joined: 2015-03-30
Senior Member
Posts: 132
Joined: 2015-03-30
#5456326 Posted on: 07/27/2017 10:38 PM
Intel Shennanigans?
Is it possible they can pull an Intel? A more successful one? You can purchase and unlock code for BIOS to unlock moar cores?
Intel Shennanigans?
Is it possible they can pull an Intel? A more successful one? You can purchase and unlock code for BIOS to unlock moar cores?
Stairmand
Senior Member
Posts: 298
Joined: 2007-07-25
Senior Member
Posts: 298
Joined: 2007-07-25
#5456348 Posted on: 07/27/2017 11:35 PM
Remember when we had BIOS hacks to unlock the 4th core on the old AMD triple core CPU's.
How freaking cool would that be.
Remember when we had BIOS hacks to unlock the 4th core on the old AMD triple core CPU's.
How freaking cool would that be.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 12314
Joined: 2003-05-24
i can see it now if they dont cut/break those extra core people will try to enable them