MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti DUKE review
Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 GAMING OC 8G review
MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
Asus GeForce RTX 2080 Ti RoG Strix review
GeForce RTX 2080 Founders review
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founders review
HyperX Predator DDR4 RGB 32GB 2933 MHz review
Nvidia Turing GeForce 2080 (Ti) architecture review
Ballistix Sport AT Gaming DDR4 RGB 32GB 3000 MHz review
Seagate Barracuda Pro 14TB HDD review
Does AMD have a Quad Channel 16 Core / 32 Thread CPU in the works?
There's a new rumor floating like a point processor onto the web, the rumor once again is from the guys at Canard PC. Earlier on they have leaked Ryzen benchmarks and information, most of their claims on Ryzen have been right.
Now here is the new info they posted in a tweet. They claim that AMD is working on a high-end desktop 16 core 32 threaded Ryzen processor series. These processors would get a relative low base-clock in the 2.4 to 2.8 GHz range but since you would hardly use all threads simultaneous, the Turbos could be much higher for up-to 8 threads (for example). Turbo's however remain undefined at this time. This processor would be quad-channel compatible. The TDP for this product would sit in the 150 Watt range. So basically the package holds 4 CCXs.
The processor would need an enthusiast chipset called X399 with socket (Land Grid Array) SP3r2 LGA and thus likely a spin-off from the server series. In that tweet this platform and processor would become available in the next 4 to 6 months. This new information might be true, but take this one with a grain of salt please.
Update: this rumor also surfaced at chiphell, stating that AMD has plans to release a new high-end desktop platform (HEDT) within the next couple of months, with a reveal at Computex. That new platform will feature a flagship CPU with 16 cores and 32 threads and sports support for quad-channel DDR4 memory, with the platform sitting in-between AMD's Ryzen/AMD CPU platform and their upcoming Naples Server platform.
If true, that would be an awesome processor series, bit I cannot help feeling it seems a bit unlikely.
GeniusPr0
Senior Member
Posts: 1210
Joined: 2003-04-26
Senior Member
Posts: 1210
Joined: 2003-04-26
#5409246 Posted on: 03/19/2017 11:17 AM
Octocores are all r7. 16 core has to be r9.
The chipset names are hilarious, trolling intel
Octocores are all r7. 16 core has to be r9.
The chipset names are hilarious, trolling intel
Hefny
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 2006-11-30
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 2006-11-30
#5409250 Posted on: 03/19/2017 11:36 AM
If Naples fits AM4 and supported by X3xx chipsets, then it might make its way out of the datacenter to the clients.
And by the way, Canard PC is not that trusted. Ryzen 5 CPU clocks are not entirely what they reported earlier, at least not for all CPUs.
If Naples fits AM4 and supported by X3xx chipsets, then it might make its way out of the datacenter to the clients.
And by the way, Canard PC is not that trusted. Ryzen 5 CPU clocks are not entirely what they reported earlier, at least not for all CPUs.
Incredible Lama
Senior Member
Posts: 107
Joined: 2016-10-13
Senior Member
Posts: 107
Joined: 2016-10-13
#5409275 Posted on: 03/19/2017 01:22 PM
Pardon my ignorance, but am I understanding correctly that gaming performance wise, this CPU would be completely uninteresting due to the low clocks (and 16 cores won;t be utilised)? Thus that makes it pretty much interesting to encoders and sorts, but not us?
If so, is there a possibility that we will see cut down versions as with the 350 chipset, that will allow for, for example, this new processor to have 8 cores, with quad channel memory performing in the same range as let's say a 1700 or 1600 gaming wise?
Pardon my ignorance, but am I understanding correctly that gaming performance wise, this CPU would be completely uninteresting due to the low clocks (and 16 cores won;t be utilised)? Thus that makes it pretty much interesting to encoders and sorts, but not us?
If so, is there a possibility that we will see cut down versions as with the 350 chipset, that will allow for, for example, this new processor to have 8 cores, with quad channel memory performing in the same range as let's say a 1700 or 1600 gaming wise?
NewTRUMP Order
Senior Member
Posts: 296
Joined: 2017-02-04
Senior Member
Posts: 296
Joined: 2017-02-04
#5409287 Posted on: 03/19/2017 01:56 PM
Uh oh now you are talking about a $1000 AMD cpu. Does AMD really want to go there? Seems to me what we have here is a Moore's law infused wish list from AMD fans. But I have been wrong before!
Uh oh now you are talking about a $1000 AMD cpu. Does AMD really want to go there? Seems to me what we have here is a Moore's law infused wish list from AMD fans. But I have been wrong before!
Evildead666
Senior Member
Posts: 845
Joined: 2003-09-14
Senior Member
Posts: 845
Joined: 2003-09-14
#5409294 Posted on: 03/19/2017 02:16 PM
If Naples fits AM4 and supported by X3xx chipsets, then it might make its way out of the datacenter to the clients.
And by the way, Canard PC is not that trusted. Ryzen 5 CPU clocks are not entirely what they reported earlier, at least not for all CPUs.
Some of the people at Canard PC are Ex x86-Secret, who were very respected back in the day, and still are.
This is not an AM4 socket, its a Server socket spinoff, which will require its own motherboard.
equate it to Intels Socket 2011 variant.
Its a logical decision to make, having multiples of 4/8 throughout.
8c/16t (6c/12t - 4c/8t) Dual-Ch Mem Desktop
16c/32t (12c/24t - 8c/16t) Quad-Ch Mem HEDT
32c/64t (28c/56t 24c/48t - 20c/40t) Oct-Ch Mem Server
Allows you to fully use the different Yield bins, and minimize waste.
If Naples fits AM4 and supported by X3xx chipsets, then it might make its way out of the datacenter to the clients.
And by the way, Canard PC is not that trusted. Ryzen 5 CPU clocks are not entirely what they reported earlier, at least not for all CPUs.
Some of the people at Canard PC are Ex x86-Secret, who were very respected back in the day, and still are.
This is not an AM4 socket, its a Server socket spinoff, which will require its own motherboard.
equate it to Intels Socket 2011 variant.
Its a logical decision to make, having multiples of 4/8 throughout.
8c/16t (6c/12t - 4c/8t) Dual-Ch Mem Desktop
16c/32t (12c/24t - 8c/16t) Quad-Ch Mem HEDT
32c/64t (28c/56t 24c/48t - 20c/40t) Oct-Ch Mem Server
Allows you to fully use the different Yield bins, and minimize waste.
Evildead666
Senior Member
Posts: 845
Joined: 2003-09-14
Senior Member
Posts: 845
Joined: 2003-09-14
#5409296 Posted on: 03/19/2017 02:23 PM
Pardon my ignorance, but am I understanding correctly that gaming performance wise, this CPU would be completely uninteresting due to the low clocks (and 16 cores won;t be utilised)? Thus that makes it pretty much interesting to encoders and sorts, but not us?
If so, is there a possibility that we will see cut down versions as with the 350 chipset, that will allow for, for example, this new processor to have 8 cores, with quad channel memory performing in the same range as let's say a 1700 or 1600 gaming wise?
Yes, this is a Workstation chip.
Lots of threads, not so much speed overall.
It will be a different socket from AM4, so a dedicated motherboard will also be required.
There might be a 8c/16t version with quad channel memory, but whether its worth the cost to gamers is debatable.
Pardon my ignorance, but am I understanding correctly that gaming performance wise, this CPU would be completely uninteresting due to the low clocks (and 16 cores won;t be utilised)? Thus that makes it pretty much interesting to encoders and sorts, but not us?
If so, is there a possibility that we will see cut down versions as with the 350 chipset, that will allow for, for example, this new processor to have 8 cores, with quad channel memory performing in the same range as let's say a 1700 or 1600 gaming wise?
Yes, this is a Workstation chip.
Lots of threads, not so much speed overall.
It will be a different socket from AM4, so a dedicated motherboard will also be required.
There might be a 8c/16t version with quad channel memory, but whether its worth the cost to gamers is debatable.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5409298 Posted on: 03/19/2017 02:28 PM
Why amd would not want to go there? What kind of company can expand to diferent demographics and they choose not too?
As for the gaming part no you do not want to invest in a 16/32 cpu for gaming :p
Uh oh now you are talking about a $1000 AMD cpu. Does AMD really want to go there? Seems to me what we have here is a Moore's law infused wish list from AMD fans. But I have been wrong before!
Why amd would not want to go there? What kind of company can expand to diferent demographics and they choose not too?
As for the gaming part no you do not want to invest in a 16/32 cpu for gaming :p
zer0_c0ol
Senior Member
Posts: 2977
Joined: 2007-04-12
Senior Member
Posts: 2977
Joined: 2007-04-12
#5409299 Posted on: 03/19/2017 02:30 PM
It is highly plausible that we could see a crippled naples hedt platform
It is highly plausible that we could see a crippled naples hedt platform
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5409303 Posted on: 03/19/2017 02:35 PM
Double post :/
Double post :/
Fender178
Senior Member
Posts: 3569
Joined: 2004-09-28
Senior Member
Posts: 3569
Joined: 2004-09-28
#5409308 Posted on: 03/19/2017 02:45 PM
I can see this CPU as a Server CPU as well. Whether or not AMD has a Server motherboard in the works that supports 2 CPUs is unknown. Makes me wonder how well this CPU fairs up against the Xeon CPUs in its class.
Also I can see this CPU being used to the User who does alot of Virtualization with virtual machines.
I can see this CPU as a Server CPU as well. Whether or not AMD has a Server motherboard in the works that supports 2 CPUs is unknown. Makes me wonder how well this CPU fairs up against the Xeon CPUs in its class.
Also I can see this CPU being used to the User who does alot of Virtualization with virtual machines.
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 447
Joined: 2008-07-16
Senior Member
Posts: 447
Joined: 2008-07-16
#5409313 Posted on: 03/19/2017 03:02 PM
HandBrake would love this !
Good thing I didn't rushed buying the 1800X, while fast, it didn't seem like a really big upgrade to the 6800K running at 4.1Ghz (it would have been some 20-30% faster with all 8 cores)
However, a 32-thread chip, even with lower clock... DAYUM ! That would be >100% performance boost to my current CPU.
BRING IT ON !
HandBrake would love this !
Good thing I didn't rushed buying the 1800X, while fast, it didn't seem like a really big upgrade to the 6800K running at 4.1Ghz (it would have been some 20-30% faster with all 8 cores)
However, a 32-thread chip, even with lower clock... DAYUM ! That would be >100% performance boost to my current CPU.
BRING IT ON !
Spawn182
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 2003-04-06
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 2003-04-06
#5409321 Posted on: 03/19/2017 03:28 PM
Call me ignorant. But wasn't it quite clear, that AMD will place a platform between the current consumer Ryzen release and the server platform.
Especially the chipsets are not really usable for a decent workstation setup (multi GPU plus storage controller plus 64GB+ Ram) and AMD would be stupid, not to get those customers on board too.
I really like the Ryzen CPU performance, but I need my PC for more than just benchmarks and gaming and the current Ryzen release is no alternative to my socket 2011-3 setup.
Call me ignorant. But wasn't it quite clear, that AMD will place a platform between the current consumer Ryzen release and the server platform.
Especially the chipsets are not really usable for a decent workstation setup (multi GPU plus storage controller plus 64GB+ Ram) and AMD would be stupid, not to get those customers on board too.
I really like the Ryzen CPU performance, but I need my PC for more than just benchmarks and gaming and the current Ryzen release is no alternative to my socket 2011-3 setup.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 6944
Joined: 2014-09-27
Senior Member
Posts: 6944
Joined: 2014-09-27
#5409358 Posted on: 03/19/2017 05:46 PM
A $1000 AMD CPU that has double the cores/threads of the $1000 Intel CPU, so your price/performance ratio for workstation stays the same.
Uh oh now you are talking about a $1000 AMD cpu. Does AMD really want to go there? Seems to me what we have here is a Moore's law infused wish list from AMD fans. But I have been wrong before!
A $1000 AMD CPU that has double the cores/threads of the $1000 Intel CPU, so your price/performance ratio for workstation stays the same.
labidas
Senior Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 2013-03-06
Senior Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 2013-03-06
#5409399 Posted on: 03/19/2017 07:51 PM
Duke AMD: "Rest in pieces, intel."
Duke AMD: "Rest in pieces, intel."
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 5770
Joined: 2010-10-17
Because of course Ryzen isn't powerful enough already