AMD's Future Chips & SoC's: News, Info & Rumours.

Page 114 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

cdrkf

Distinguished
Zen 3 for the desktop will likely be released on Q3/Q4 of 2020 based on latest news from various sites.
We can expect some insights on Zen 3 desktop on Computex.
Zen 4 will likely be launched in 2021 and the end of AM4 platform.
Hmm... I'm not convinced we'll see Zen 4 on the AM4 socket, although I don't think anyone can say for sure as Zen 4 design isn't finished yet based on latest slides for server roadmap....
 
Zen 3 for the desktop will likely be released on Q3/Q4 of 2020 based on latest news from various sites.
We can expect some insights on Zen 3 desktop on Computex.
Zen 4 will likely be launched in 2021 and the end of AM4 platform.
With Intel still not stepping up I'd not be surprised if AMD starts delaying release of Zen3 and 4. Correctly done the controversy such a tactic generates could help far more than hurt.

Does anyone know for a fact even Zen3, much less Zen4, will be released on AM4?
 
Dec 27, 2019
37
8
35
0
Sadly from a business standpoint i see no reason why they should release Zen 3 this year. But from a technical standpoint it should be ready to launch Amd already bought a bunch of TSMC's production for 7nm.

Plus as an enthusiast i REALLY want to see Amd smoke Intel's IPC to a point where no one will ever question if Amd can beat Intel again in terms of IPC.
 

Eximo

Titan
Herald
TSMC has another process improvement on the books, no reason for AMD not to take advantage. Stated numbers give it roughly a 15% density improvement. Also the same node for 4000 series mobile, not quite clear?

Every source I can find is saying late 2020 for Zen 3 on 7nm+

Zen 4 expected to be a process node shrink to 5nm.

As for a business reason, steamrolling an entire cycle of enthusiast PC gamers into adopting AMD, pretty good business idea for the underdog. They had me through 2010 or so, been nearly 10 years since my main system has run AMD. That marketshare generates buzz, regardless if the overall adoption of AMD vs Intel doesn't reach the mainstream immediately. They keep improving what they have rapidly and no reason to consider Intel.

I'm waiting to see the cracks in Intel, dropping K series and Z boards and just allow overclocking across the board. Only thing they can do to be on par with AMD on the low end.
 
...
I'm waiting to see the cracks in Intel, dropping K series and Z boards and just allow overclocking across the board. Only thing they can do to be on par with AMD on the low end.
Intel never did that back in the early/mid-2000's when AMD was steadily gaining on them.

With the market share they enjoy in pre-builts I don't see them changing their business model. Which is to use the pre-built market to sell perfectly functional computers to businesses (who are terrified of the users dinking with the system anyway). Then stick it to enthusiasts who'll willingly pay dearly for the prestige alone.
 

Eximo

Titan
Herald
I don't disagree on their contracts and market presence, just saying why AMD should do what they can while they have an advantage.

As I recall, overclocking on Intel was quite prevalent during those times, wasn't until late 2000s they started with the Z and K designations, formerly P on the chipsets. I recall people overclocking E and Q processors all the time, I've certainly helped a few people do it. Some boards were certainly better than others, but not actually restricted as they are now, and you didn't need the most expensive models to overclock, which is true today.

Maybe I am mistaken and the people that come forward with boards from that time always pick the right ones. Though I certainly worked on a few Q6600 back then, easy to get them to run at 3Ghz up from 2.4Ghz.
 
...
As I recall, overclocking on Intel was quite prevalent during those times, ..
To be sure they were overclockable, but Dell and HP/Compaq and IBM/Lenovo business systems were (mostly) locked up tight for selling into business markets, which is what makes Intel their bigger and steadier sales income (server market aside). As I recall, Intell did it then through the motherboards, either chipsets or other support chips and sometimes just BIOS'. But that's less reliable and often hacked by a determined geek.

Some of the systems sold for home use could be overclocked, if I recall, but for many cheaper ones you'd have to use a hacked BIOS or utility that would usually crash Windows. You really had to build your own if you wanted assured overclocking or buy one from one of the computer shows or a VAR. People were crazy about it; Netburst, like Bulldozer, overclocked really well if you could handle the heat output. I remember there were a few Celeron models that were overclocking beasts and more than made up for their cache deficiency.

So that dual-personality of their markets had to influence the idea to go with K processors later on. I mean: what a great way to stick it to the die-hard Intel enthusiasts while guaranteeing the business pre-builts will stay stable and cheaply supportable through the design service life. I just don't think Intel would change the business model they established even back then, and perfected today.
 
Last edited:

jaymc

Distinguished
Dec 7, 2007
593
5
18,985
0
This one has a desktop chip in it... it's a "Desktop Replacement" laptop and it is the first one of the new Ryzen 3000 series, there was an Asus Laptop made from first generation Ryzen desktop chip... this one is the 12c R9 3000 series desktop chip not the 8c APU.

Cheers
 
Dec 27, 2019
37
8
35
0
Amd has never been in this position before not even in the athlon days. They finally have great products and great management.

Once in the past 25 years of following Amd i can say i actually have faith that they will be able to compete if not beat Intel. Intel got lazy and cheap over the past 5 years and they will pay for it. Luckily for Intel they can afford too.

If anything i'm a bit more worried about Amd's GPU division i would love to see them compete with Nvidia like they did 8 years ago.

EDIT OMG Amd hit $50 a share at this point they will be at $60 by the end of the year with Zen 3 and Big Navi

2 Biggest mistakes i made financially in my life is NOT buying Amd stock when it was less then a 1.50$ and two laughing at Bitcoins.

I was just debating with someone a month ago that Amd was going to hit $50 they claimed 44$ was it
 
Last edited:
Dec 27, 2019
37
8
35
0
Guys this is actually a pretty sweet video comparing IPC on 2004-2019 CPU's its very interesting seeing Bulldozer behind K10 haha, i knew before it came out that the CPU was going to have lower IPC or at BEST be on par and that is what we are seeing.

For real we don't get comparisons like this anymore sadly this guy deserves the views

Man the 5600XT for sure is a nice product finally Amd is back with its performance per dollar win and they are competitive with the 2060 in TDP too

View: https://youtu.be/psKEiWXDR28?t=154
 
Last edited:
Reactions: jaymc
Dec 27, 2019
37
8
35
0
Googling it a 1650 Super is 6.6B transistors and a 5500XT is 6.4 so actually i guess i under estimated how good Navi really is compared to Nvidia's current design please NOTE i'm not a Amd fanboy of GPU's in fact with all the talk about drivers i wouldn't buy a Navi based 2080Ti unless it was seriously cheap(like $500), plus i love G-sync and spent a ton on my monitor that wouldn't work with Amd GPU's sadly.

But i have to always respect decent designs when i see them. Amd IMO finally caught up with Nvidia's architecture at least on 12nm lol.

Ah progress nonetheless

Also yah though i don't think its as simple as Amd pays per transistor but here it is

Each 7nm CCD measures ~74mm2 and has 3.9 billion transistors
RTX 2060 10.8B, 5600XT 10.3B

I guess we also have to point out Amd's lack of dedicated ray tracing hardware and i have no doubts that if Nvidia didn't put RTX hardware in they would have been able to make a more powerful standard GPU with the same transistor count.
 
Last edited:
While I don't disagree that Navi looks good, the 1650's transistor count comes from the bigger siblings (1660ti) and the vanilla 1650 is only 4.4; what I'm trying to say is that while Navi closed the gap, nVidia is still edging out AMD in terms of "transistor efficiency" (sort of speaking). The current advantage AMD has in some segments is purely due to process and not uArch.

Cheers!
 
Dec 27, 2019
37
8
35
0
While I don't disagree that Navi looks good, the 1650's transistor count comes from the bigger siblings (1660ti) and the vanilla 1650 is only 4.4; what I'm trying to say is that while Navi closed the gap, nVidia is still edging out AMD in terms of "transistor efficiency" (sort of speaking). The current advantage AMD has in some segments is purely due to process and not uArch.

Cheers!
Amd has never been this close to Nvidia in years and with RDNA 2.0 being even any improvement it really makes me hopeful that they might pull it off they might actually be competitive with Nvidia again.

Again just for my case i won't be switching back for years to come just over my monitor but i really want them to keep up with Nvidia. If they can beat Intel they sure in hell can beat Nvidia. GPU's are WAY less complicated then CPU's and there's a LOT less legacy crap they have to support.
 

JaSoN_cRuZe

Reputable
Mar 5, 2017
413
34
4,890
30
I strongly believe that AMD will release Zen 3 powered desktop under Q3 2020 where B550 boards will be a precursor to its launch.

The only thing which can be causing the delay of Zen 3 desktop units might be the dragging of x670 chipsets which is about to be released along with them.

Anyways we will definitely see Zen 3 in 2020 and expecting some major announcements in Computex.
 
Dec 27, 2019
37
8
35
0
I strongly believe that AMD will release Zen 3 powered desktop under Q3 2020 where B550 boards will be a precursor to its launch.

The only thing which can be causing the delay of Zen 3 desktop units might be the dragging of x670 chipsets which is about to be released along with them.

Anyways we will definitely see Zen 3 in 2020 and expecting some major announcements in Computex.
To this day i have no idea why anyone wants B550 so much for sure it wouldn't stop me from buying a new rig, B550 will most likely only be PCI-E 4.0 on MAYBE just the GPU and nothing else and won't be anything less then the already amazing B450 Tomahawk.

X600 sounds WAYYYYY more interesting with USB 4.0 i could see waiting for that as that's actually going to matter as PCI-E 4.0 is going to die FAST. Intel can't even get PCI-E 4.0 to work yet lol.

I personally don't see DDR5 being a thing for consumers until 2023 honestly

I wonder what speeds it will be at with DDR3 we had 2400mhz top out and 2133 JDEC spec's for DDR4 is 2133mhz, so with DDR4 topping out at 5000 we can assume using the same percentage difference of 2400/2133 that we should start out around 4200-4400mhz.
 
Guys this is actually a pretty sweet video comparing IPC on 2004-2019 CPU's its very interesting seeing Bulldozer behind K10 haha, i knew before it came out that the CPU was going to have lower IPC or at BEST be on par and that is what we are seeing.
The funny part is this finally disproves the "wait for software to use more cores" argument that was repeated over and over to try and justify the disaster BD was.
 
Dec 27, 2019
37
8
35
0
The funny part is this finally disproves the "wait for software to use more cores" argument that was repeated over and over to try and justify the disaster BD was.
I could write for pages about why Bulldozer was always going to be a terrible design, i used to debate with an employee from Amd just about this. In no way was IPC going to go up and i predicted at best it would be about on par.

Was the dumbest design even leading Prescott IMO.

As a side note Amd is behind Intel by 13% in frequency(4.7Ghz vs 5.3Ghz) i really think Zen 3 is going to finally have Amd on top in terms of ST performance across the board.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: jaymc

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS