Does AMD have a Quad Channel 16 Core / 32 Thread CPU in the works?
Click here to post a comment for Does AMD have a Quad Channel 16 Core / 32 Thread CPU in the works? on our message forum
BLEH!
Because of course Ryzen isn't powerful enough already :P This would make for a great workstation CPU 😀
GeniusPr0
Octocores are all r7. 16 core has to be r9.
The chipset names are hilarious, trolling intel
Hefny
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
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
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
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
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
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 😛
zer0_c0ol
It is highly plausible that we could see a crippled naples hedt platform
Venix
Double post :/
Fender178
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
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
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
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
Duke AMD: "Rest in pieces, intel."
Silva
Not in the next 3 to 5 years anyway. It will be worth it when the code evolves to use all the threads efficiently.
Not a fanboy myself but I believe they have too much market share to be out of the game. Plus, some people still buy Intel cuz "it's the best" or something...
Intel will need time to come up with something. Ryzen has taken AMD 4 years, Intel is bigger and has more resources but I'd say 1 to 2 years before any real response.
Aura89
Define: us
This is a hardware site, that obviously caters to gamers since gamers are in general interested in hardware, but it's not a "gamers only hardware site" by any means.
If the staff of this site would like to correct me, that's perfectly fine.
If not, then who is "us" Incredible Lama?
Doubtful, since an 8-core would not be defined as an "HEDT".
FerCam™
This is what I was waiting for! Bring it on!
Fender178
For what this CPU is geared towards Intel has a huge market share in that department.
schmidtbag
I can't help but facepalm when people ask anything gaming related for a CPU like this. Even the Ryzen 7s aren't a good fit for gamers (great CPUs, but get a Ryzen 5 instead).
This CPU is just a desktop version of one of the Opterons AMD is planning to release. That being said, what confuses me is how exactly quad-channel memory is supposed to be achieved. Unless there's something I'm not understanding, this would require a new chipset (X390?) or else the CPU will either be stuck in dual-channel or (in a more likely scenario) not work at all.
I vaguely remember seeing one of AMD's roadmaps around a year ago where socket AM4 was going to be relatively short-lived, where after a year or two, AM4+ was going to be released. Assuming these 16-core chips will in fact exist at consumer-level, they're probably going to be apart of this AM4+ socket.
