Considering the rumor I've seen that X5/Logan brings the biggest perf jump so far of the X series that doesn't bode well for QC 😅Well X4 beats it so...
Every Cortex-X has that rumour and they all turn out to be lukewarm at best.Considering the rumor I've seen that X5/Logan brings the biggest perf jump so far of the X series that doesn't bode well for QC 😅
It's still a very much fine core for server but yea.From what I remember Nuvia's OG focus was an ARM64 server core so it doesn't seem a stretch that design specs were altered negatively to favor QC's WARMtop/smartphone focus instead.
Didn't also a chunk of Nuvia team leave, after taking the money from Qualcomm?A solid chunk of the team left to Nuvia, kek.
Just that they've underdelivered a fair bit.
No.Didn't also a chunk of Nuvia team leave, after taking the money from Qualcomm?
I was just giving out a bit of concext about 2024 CPU landscape.instead of every other non-Intel chip out there ????? I do believe this is a Zen 5 thread.
don't threaten me with a good time ? /amd fanI was just giving out a bit of concext about 2024 CPU landscape.
What was supposed to be a hyper-competitive year is now a wasteland with one champion standing triumphant.
It won't be a good time when you see the prices.don't threaten me with a good time ? /amd fan
Somehow one reply turned into 3 pages of NO Zen 5, thats why I replied.I was just giving out a bit of concext about 2024 CPU landscape.
What was supposed to be a hyper-competitive year is now a wasteland with one champion standing triumphant.
Yea because Apple is pretty good at core design and their freq targets are low.
Zen5c is also sorta comparable area.
Didn't Qualcomm say announement this year and release early Q1 2024 for their laptop chips. Unless it got delayed again.Late next year.
Kinda but many ways to skin a cat.The big difference here that makes the comparison between Apple P cores and AMD c cores somewhat one sided is that everything in an Apple P core is optimized around low-mid frequency operation
Of course, it's lowest effort for biggest ROI.To my knowledge, there has been exactly zero effort in Zen4c optimize the implementation for the reduced frequency range.
No they'll forever be a low-effort poverty option, which is the point.I expect the Zen c cores will diverge more against regular big cores with each successive generation
Never.eventually, c cores get to the point where a combination of improved IPC, power, and area efficiency obsoletes the development of regular big cores
The thing got delayed twice since then.Unless it got delayed again.
Not going to hold you to it (for obvious reasons) but hypothetically where do you think Zen 5 desktop pricing ends up at for 8950X?It won't be a good time when you see the prices.
$999 take it or leave it.where do you think Zen 5 desktop pricing ends up at for 8950X?
if the rumours of zen 5 are true then it's not a bad deal especially as arrow lake seems that it'll come out on life support.$999 take it or leave it.
No they'll forever be a low-effort poverty option, which is the point.
You take class leading core and you make a low freq floorplan for it.
They also increase the core count potential per socket and I doubt that is cheap at the higher end for Sienna.No they'll forever be a low-effort poverty option, which is the point.
Why waste effort?I find it quite difficult to believe that AMD wouldn't try to pluck some low hanging fruit in 5c or at least 6c
No.It's entirely possible, if not probable, that c cores significantly supersede regular big cores in enterprise
Well they did.You really think AMD will ignore all that low hanging fruit on what is very likely going to become their most important product?
I don't think AMD will price 8950X @ $999. In fact, I think AMD will price Ryzen 8000 series similar to current pricing of Zen4, maybe slight price premium but not $999. There is X3D version of Zen 5 coming and I believe AMD will position it like current one.$999 take it or leave it.
That's what you'd think, isn't it?Yea because Apple is pretty good at core design and their freq targets are low.Apple P cores are crazy small compared to Intels and a bit smaller than AMD Zen4.
Zen5c is also sorta comparable area.
Bergamo is not IFoP limited. It only uses 8 ports although the sIOD has 12 available.Bergamo is super impressive despite having one hand tied behind its back (could have been 192-cores with a 16-core CCX or more IF links on the server IOD). You really think AMD will ignore all that low hanging fruit on what is very likely going to become their most important product?