News AMD's Ryzen 8000 'Strix Point' to Use Zen 5 and Zen 5c Cores: Report

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Having the 4 fastest cores in one CCX by themselves could be a problem. Should be interesting to see the benchmarks.

The Historical Fidelity said:
I really hope AMD and Intel APUs get to a point where Nvidia has no reason to release price gouged low end cards that aren’t any more powerful than the last model but come with DLSS 4’s “Artificial Frame Injection” tech lol, or is it “Frame Synthesis” tech, or “frame Infusion” tech??? Haha
Click to expand...
Intel should make a desktop APU.
 
adunlucas said:
Why did AMD just killed Jaguar cores? Think could be usefull now at big.LITTLE.
Click to expand...
This is the way they are going for now. Big cores, and medium cores with the same IPC (when no cache penalty), lower clocks, less L3 cache (optional, depends on the design), and an area reduction (depends, they can bin the big cores). It avoids some of the problems of Intel's approach and it's easier to design.

Whenever they start using FinFlex, they should be able to have performance optimized and area optimized cores on the same die. I don't know if Strix Point will do that yet. Whatever the case, AMD's "big" cores are very tiny these days, so including 8 or 12 of them is no problem.
 
Sounds like an OK compromise. If they can keep the power to performance ratio good, it might be a good thing.

I don't need a laptop for a while, but I'd love to get a long lasting Linux beast as the next one.
 
It'll be interesting to see how they approach the "c" cores with Zen 5. Ian Cutress did an interview with I think PC World where he talked about the clockspeed scaling with Zen 4c. With Zen 4c the power efficiency is absolutely shot compared to Zen 4 once you reach a certain clockspeed so you'd be better off just going with full cores and maximizing turbo. He was pretty confident this was why we wouldn't see any hybrid CPUs with Zen 4, but if they're planning one with Zen 5 something must have changed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scottslayer
thestryker said:
Ian Cutress did an interview with I think PC World where he talked about the clockspeed scaling with Zen 4c. With Zen 4c the power efficiency is absolutely shot compared to Zen 4 once you reach a certain clockspeed so you'd be better off just going with full cores and maximizing turbo.
Click to expand...
Servethehome.com reviewed the 128c/256t Bergamo. They loaded a dual socket system with all cores at 100% load. The Bergamo stayed rock steady at 3.1GHz across 256c for hours on end. Note 3.1GHz is the all core boost as well.
 
adunlucas said:
Why did AMD just killed Jaguar cores? Think could be usefull now at big.LITTLE.
Click to expand...
Originally the Bobcat core was designed to give 80% of the performance as a K8 at the same clock speed but at only an 18W envelope. However, after several iterations it was never scaling as well in performance. The final core design, Puma, was pretty anemic by 2014 even with the top end chip A8-6410. Even with 4 cores it was slower than the i3-4030u and both were 15W chips. Zen4c on the other hand keeps close to Zen4's IPC and still has SMT but lower clock rates to keep power down while increasing core count. Not to mention the cores are all the same uArch. This makes it easier for the CPU scheduler and programmers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usertests
jeremyj_83 said:
Servethehome.com reviewed the 128c/256t Bergamo. They loaded a dual socket system with all cores at 100% load. The Bergamo stayed rock steady at 3.1GHz across 256c for hours on end. Note 3.1GHz is the all core boost as well.
Click to expand...
Yes as that's the most efficient clockspeed for them, and if you go above it the efficiency gains are gone completely and it becomes worse than a regular Zen 4 core. This is why it doesnt really make sense to use outside of high core count servers which are power limited per core already and boosting is worse than stable clocks.
 
thestryker said:
Yes as that's the most efficient clockspeed for them, and if you go above it the efficiency gains are gone completely and it becomes worse than a regular Zen 4 core. This is why it doesnt really make sense to use outside of high core count servers which are power limited per core already and boosting is worse than stable clocks.
Click to expand...
Where did you see that efficiency drops to worse than Zen 4? The servethehome review I referenced doesn't say that.
 
thisisaname said:
Looking good just hope AMD do not find a new way to shoot themselves in the foot.
Click to expand...
:) i love my AMD stuff but they seem to take 1 step forward and 2 steps back of late ..

Which is not good for their fight with Nvidia and their already established market share AMD really need win after win after win to claw the rep , market share and customers in their favor !!
 
  • Like
Reactions: thisisaname and The Historical Fidelity
ilukey77 said:
:) i love my AMD stuff but they seem to take 1 step forward and 2 steps back of late ..

Which is not good for their fight with Nvidia and their already established market share AMD really need win after win after win to claw the rep , market share and customers in their favor !!
Click to expand...
Totally agree, they need to be sacrificing short term profit for long term ecosystem driven sales like Nvidia relies on now. Countless people I’ve given pc building advice are very hesitant to switch to AMD because all they’ve known is Intel and Nvidia and they worry it’ll be a huge ordeal relearning and getting used to a new ecosystem. (Not everyone who builds computers is an enthusiast, most have only a lamen understanding beyond assembly)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ilukey77
The Historical Fidelity said:
Totally agree, they need to be sacrificing short term profit for long term ecosystem driven sales like Nvidia relies on now. Countless people I’ve given pc building advice are very hesitant to switch to AMD because all they’ve known is Intel and Nvidia and they worry it’ll be a huge ordeal relearning and getting used to a new ecosystem. (Not everyone who builds computers is an enthusiast, most have only a lamen understanding beyond assembly)
Click to expand...
im one of them lamen beyond assembly .. i know a little past the obvious things and building i put things together overkill cpu cooling and psu wattage ..
so far fingers crossed every time i build it works without any major issues i cant fix !!

That said i built my first computer 4 years ago i used the 5700xt red devil because the 2070 super which was its competitor was cheaper and the 3700x was cheaper than the intel parts i was looking at so hence my love of AMD no issues and ive been happy with their products since ( even though my brand loyalty start and ends with a bad product )

Ive currently got 4 fully built computers 7800x3d/7900xtx -- 5800x3d /6900xt -- 5600x/ARC770 -- 10850k/6650xt ohh and a 6700xt gathering dust at the moment ..

So when i say i love my AMD stuff i do as i have enough of it !!

Nvidia has always been a after though for a few reasons A. price always more expensive
B. there really really bad business practices ( 3 3080s drip feeding rubbish to upsell there better products ) have always turned me away..

Like Intel and their BS socket life span ( like their cpus ) hate their socket like so i buy AMD!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Historical Fidelity
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom