Up to 96 cores and 12 DDR5 memory channels with AMD Zen4-based server processors.

#5938733 Posted on: 08/17/2021 01:54 PM

---

I like the idea, 1 PS CPU.

#5938739 Posted on: 08/17/2021 02:17 PM

---

AMD is reaching a point with these sockets where budget CPUs won't really make sense. I'm sure a 6000+ pin socket is expensive to manufacture, especially when you consider all the gold plating. Imagine having something like an 8-core CPU in one of those boards - seems like it'd be a real waste. The thing is, unless AMD releases AM5 Epycs or continues with LGA4094, there isn't really going to be an option for people who want a low-end server. I would argue servers with 8 cores would still be practical, if what you're looking for is the oodles of PCIe lanes. You don't need 6000 pins for that.

#5938754 Posted on: 08/17/2021 03:09 PM

---

You still need pins for 128 lanes of PCIE 4.0, and now we have 50% more DRAM channels on DDR5 (more pins on top of more slots). That is all matched to a big I/O die that does all that, which is the same no matter your core configurations at that point.

#5938758 Posted on: 08/17/2021 03:23 PM

---

There are a ton of options for low end servers and it all depends on what you are using it for. This chips looks better suited for supercomputing in a compact environment. My guess is there will be older Epic chips that may be sold or modified to fill in the gap between this and lets say a Threadripper. Virtualization goes a long way in solving dissimilar processors in one environment as a whole if you want a cheap and practical server environment.

#5938762 Posted on: 08/17/2021 03:43 PM

---

Ah right I forgot about the extra memory channels; that would make a difference. Though even then... nobody needs 12 channels with 8 cores, or even 16 cores. It's likely that we won't see something below 16 for this socket. But that leads to my original point: AMD won't really have a middle-ground by the time this is released: you're either getting a massive socket meant for huge core counts, you get the Threadrippers (which aren't ideal for many server workloads), or you get a small socket with just barely enough features for a gaming PC.


Currently there are low-end server options, but my point is the motherboards will be built to handle these giant CPUs (it's not just the socket, but all the power delivery stuff too), which is going to drive up the cost of entry-level systems considerably. So unless there will be some motherboards manufactured with fewer pins and weaker power delivery (which adds complication to the consumer), there's a rather large gap in sensible products.
The way I see it, assuming AMD doesn't release a Threadripper based on this socket, they should have TRs and low-end Epycs share the same smaller socket, where you pick the CPU that best fits your needs. Once you go below 32 cores, there's no point in having dual-socket options, 128 PCIe lanes, or 12 memory channels, so for people who don't need such power, motherboards could be made much cheaper.