Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)

[Vattila]

Except for the details about the improvements in the microarchitecture, we now know pretty well what to expect with Zen 3.

The leaked presentation by AMD Senior Manager Martin Hilgeman shows that EPYC 3 "Milan" will, as promised and expected, reuse the current platform (SP3), and the system architecture and packaging looks to be the same, with the same 9-die chiplet design and the same maximum core and thread-count (no SMT-4, contrary to rumour). The biggest change revealed so far is the enlargement of the compute complex from 4 cores to 8 cores, all sharing a larger L3 cache ("32+ MB", likely to double to 64 MB, I think).

Hilgeman's slides did also show that EPYC 4 "Genoa" is in the definition phase (or was at the time of the presentation in September, at least), and will come with a new platform (SP5), with new memory support (likely DDR5).

What else do you think we will see with Zen 4? PCI-Express 5 support? Increased core-count? 4-way SMT? New packaging (interposer, 2.5D, 3D)? Integrated memory on package (HBM)?

Vote in the poll and share your thoughts!

 

[nicalandia]

Clock for clock Zen 4 vs Golden Cove in ST portion of GB5 (12900KS @ 5.4-5.5Ghz Vs 7600X @ ~5.4Ghz according to .gb5):

Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D30 vs Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D69 - Geekbench

browser.geekbench.com

When I saw AMD Pitting the 7600X against the 12900K, you know they just beat ADL at every meaningful performance measurements, Gaming and productivity.

 

[rainy]

There's also no guarantee that the IMC on a Zen 4 will even work at DDR5-6000, since it is officially rated for 5200.

You've clearly missed that: https://www.techpowerup.com/297736/...at-applies-zen-4-ddr5-6000-sweetspot-settings

Btw, limiting access to your profile wasn't a great idea because I was still able to find this "gem" of yours:

Frankly, Alder Lake is so far ahead of Zen 3 that Zen 4 is unlikely to do anything more than catch up to that 2021 chip.

 

[FangBLade]

Shady, reb0rn and similar Intel army, you should celebrate instead being triggered, AMD made huge jump again, and that means Intel will need to follow it, i can safely say we won't watch skylake era and 1% perf jumps anymore, core count will increase, perf jump will be huge, they are pushing each other like nothing before. AMD is stable company now, they are increasing R&D budget every year and that's good thing.

 

[DrMrLordX]

What are those specific primary, sub, or tertiary timings that give a significant advantage to one over the other? How do the specific timings that provide your claimed significant performance boost manifest themselves in actual performance data?

One example is/was trfc values. AMD memory controllers typically want much lower trfc/trfc2/trfc4 values than Intel memory controllers at a given clockspeed and given primary timings. XMP has clasically set screwed up trfc values on AMD CPUs. Then it'll set funky voltages to try to get everything to work . . .

All you're really telling me here is that you don't know anything about RAM, especially as regards memory sub timings and Intel-specific XMP vs AMD specific AMP / EXPO.

That wasn't very nice.

 

[Thunder 57]

Their entire presentation is polluted by the fact that they effectively ran overclocked systems, arbitrarily stopping at DDR5-6000 using AMD specific performance enhancing timings.

To be blunt I thought that was plainly obvious once the system specs were revealed.

Intel could just as well present Alder Lake at DDR5-7800. They could say, "This is optimal for Alder Lake. Good Luck!"

You really are fighting a losing battle. Why don't you just come out and say "mehhh AMD te suxx, Intel gud" already?

 

[Rigg]

All you're really telling me here is that you don't know anything about RAM, especially as regards memory sub timings and Intel-specific XMP vs AMD specific AMP / EXPO.

Yep nothing at all



Pipe down on the insults, provide some meaningful data, or STFU.

 

[nicalandia]

Lets wait and see how those two Massive FP Registers perform. AMD invested dearly on them


Deleted Twitt by source

 

[carrotmania]

Current prices from newegg

Core i7 12700F = $315
GIGABYTE B660M AORUS PRO AX = $128
32GB DDR4 3600 CL16 = $96

Total for Alder Lake= $539

Core i7 13700K = $400
GIGABYTE B660M AORUS PRO AX = $128
32GB DDR4 3600 CL16 = $96

Total for Raptor Lake = $624

----------------------------------------
Ryzen 7600X = $300
B650 = $125 (lets assume they will be available at launch)
32GB DDR5 6000 CL40 = $220

Total for 6 core ZEN4 = $645

Im sorry im not giving this money for a six core in the end of 2022 start of 2023.

With Intel rumoured to increase prices by 20%, a 12700K was $409, so a 13700K should be ~$500.

7600X will be about the same performance as a 13700 with DDR4, which you're actually paying ~$720 for. Then in 15-18 months, IF Intel get something out before 2025, it'll be:

Core i7 14700K = $500
GIGABYTE B760M AORUS PRO AX = $128
32GB DDR5 6000 CL40 = $220

ANOTHER $720 for a midrange system. Or get a 8950X that's 50% (ST) faster than a 7950X (AMD are reportedly REALLY excited about Zen5) and spend that $20 on, you know, yourself. You're worth it.

 

[Rigg]

Hmm this could sound like clock stretching.. I hope not

If he sat manual static OC @ 5050mhz then its not clock stretching. (if it behave same as on Zen3)

If he sat minus vcore offset / static vcore and still let the cpu boost itself, then it very well could be clock stretching..

We need to see performance numbers to decide

Reminds me of the day Zen 2 launched and I could barely contain myself when my 3900x was maintaining incredible clocks while sipping power with a huge negative vcore offset. Then I ran cinebench.

 

[deasd]

It is going to lose to the locked 6+8 i5s with the E Core Spam. Maybe not by much (@ 110 W) but probally 15-16k. This based upon NBC's ADL mobile results.

E core SPAMMING would shine in some situation but others do not, especially if you consider the complexity of scheduler.

And locked i5 doesn't have enough clock to compete against 7600x. Only if you care about the well-thread benches which don't make heavy use of AVX256/512.

I have some horrible examples showing how bad the big-LITTLE perform in realworld but I wouldn't post them in AMD thread.

Not in ST.. Let's face it if you get a 7600X it will not be for MT workloads, but for Gaming. Pair that with a High end GPU and you are set for the next few years(as you would if you have selected any late 6C/12T CPU built in the last 2 years)

'MT workload' is too ambiguous. It all depends on how you use your PC......

Remember, linear scaling is an indicator of a terrible benchmark.

Close to linear I think, so the MT clock had to be around 5300mhz @110W. Impressive, to say the least.

Cinebench scales pretty well with clock. But the 7600x the VCZ benched lacked some details like clock and voltage behavior. Especially I just wonder the CPB and PBO differences inside Zen4, is CPB behavior closed to PBO limit?

 

[LightningZ71]

Looking just at the 12 core, the improvement from Zen 2 to Zen 3 was "small". The reason why Zen 4 is showing these absurd gains it because Zen 3 was power constrained? At the top of my ignorance looks like the new TDP is allowing Zen to give all it got.

The 5900X and 5950X were constrained in two ways, which is evident when you compared the all-core MT load clock speeds between the 5800x and the two dual CCD parts. The dual CCD parts would often run up against limitations in memory throughput having the same memory setup as the 5800x. They were also constrained by total socket power, having notably lower all core frequencies than the 5800x, unless you messed with the power limits. Once the power limits were relaxed, you then ran up against the limits of extracting heat from the total package. N5 as used in Zen4 and the new DDR5 memory system address all three of those limits.

 

[Hans de Vries]

A second Ryzen 9 7900X userbenchmark result really blows everything on the top list away

https://userbenchmark.com/UserRun/55296903

143% versus the 117% of the Ryzen 5 7600X from july. The average i9 12900KS scores 115%

 

[Kaluan]

PS3 emulator will FLYYYYYY on Zen 4.

Dolphin Emulator as well, but not for the same reasons, check this out:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1567129743077638145

@nicalandia
To me it is pretty clear that these aren't final numbers for the 13400. Or are the clocks supposed to be that low? I would have expected performance to be more like a 12600.

Low? It's a (up to) 4,6GHz P core (GB ST lines up very well to 12400's low 1600s) and 3,3GHz E cores (lower than any 12th gen). With a PL2 of around 117W.

I'm talking about the overall MT and ST performance of 13400 part, as per my own estimate here: bit.ly/3PEY8cM

You estimated a PL2=117W (or around that) Alder Lake to be within 2% of a PL2=150W Alder Lake? Really? The clocks on their own should be a dead giveaway that 13400 is not = to 12600K, let alone the much more modest PL2. 7600X will eat it for breakfast. Especially in lightly-threaded tasks and gaming.


I see no one is looking at the most obvious culprit of all from that GB run. 13400 seems to be running in single channel mode (RAM reported as 8GB). But GB isn't the most trustworthy in reporting system specs, so who knows.
Either way, I don't think this SKU will crack 10K MT points, even under a more optimal setup. People expecting it to cost the same as 12400 should prepare for disappointment, in about 3 months or so.

 

[maddogmcgee]

Looks promising initially despite higher power draw, but I will withhold judgement until I can read what Userbenchmark has to say.

 

[nicalandia]

AMD has made a lot of $250 backpacks and needs clicks.

I am Sick And Tired of LTT Hyperbolic and Click Baiting headlines and Thumbnails

 

[inf64]

Looks like Rapter Lake will really be ahead of Zen 4, at least in performance ("at what coast?!" Yes, despite that).

I think you will be (again) disappointed. Raptor Lake is basically E core spam with slight clock uplift vs 12900KS. It will not match the MT performance of 7950X (stock vs stock) and it might edge out ST and gaming by a hair. At what cost? At the cost of consuming 100W more and being on a dead end platform.

Raptor Lake will shine in the mid-range (7700X/7600X) and AMD might have a problem there.

btw, we missed the most important question: Can it run Crysis

Video by Dr. Cutress

7950X is ~25% faster than 12900K in Crysis. Almost there at magical 25fps barrier!

 

[DrMrLordX]

I would argue that prosumer needing connectivity could swallow paying 24 hundred for 24 core Threadripper easily. If not, he is not a REAL PROsumer.

You already have people in this very thread who are in the market for such machines telling you that TR Pro doesn't justify its price for their needs. You do not get to decide who is or is not a "prosumer".

 

[Det0x]

In regards to "HEDT" vs 7950x:
I actually managed to "outbench" a Zen2 threadripper with twice the numbers of cores in techpowerup.com forums 7-zip benchmark thread


I'm only getting to know the plattform but its clear to me that Zen4 is very fast

 

[nicalandia]

By the Way, I just got banned from Techpowerup Forums, because of the 5800X vs 12900k 4090 GPU Benchmarks.

 

[Kaluan]

I don't blame him, you were being a muppet.

Except he's kinda right.

Last CPU tested by TPU/Wizzard before Ryzen 7000 came out:

Ryzen 7000 review day results:

It's like they're trying super hard every time AMD releases sonething to still paint Intel on top, even if by just 0,1%

For crying out loud, look back at their Ryzen 5000 launch day reviews, they have crap like i7 10700 on top (and 3%+ over the likes of 5800X or 5900X) LMAO


Also, they never show percentile lows, which ultimately make their "gaming" reviews useless either way, bias or not.

Edit: Just noticed how they pulled out 12900KS "results" just so they can have something to eek a statistical error win over the 5800X3D, then when they don't need it anymore, just 12900K will do, they remove it from the chart. Jeez that's almost userbenchmark levels of clownery.

 

[Thunder 57]

Except he's kinda right.

Last CPU tested by TPU/Wizzard before Ryzen 7000 came out:
View attachment 69456
Ryzen 7000 review day results:
View attachment 69457
It's like they're trying super hard every time AMD releases sonething to still paint Intel on top, even if by just 0,1%

For crying out loud, look back at their Ryzen 5000 launch day reviews, they have crap like i7 10700 on top (and 3%+ over the likes of 5800X or 5900X) LMAO


Also, they never show percentile lows, which ultimately make their "gaming" reviews useless either way, bias or not.

Edit: Just noticed how they pulled out 12900KS "results" just so they can have something to eek a statistical error win over the 5800X3D, then when they don't need it anymore, just 12900K will do, they remove it from the chart. Jeez that's almost userbenchmark levels of clownery.

Wow, didn't realize it was that bad. That's why more reputable sites use the same set of benchmarks for a certain time frame and don't just pick and choose what puts their preferred brand on top. Guess they've been exposed.

 

[Schmide]

guess what the "c" actually stands for?

You freaking asked us to guess?!

Some of you guys need to get out of this thread.

Unsure if trolling or not, but I will explain. (snip rant)

None of that explanation contradicted nor complemented what I said.

So don't play moderator. I and others have every right to be in any thread on this board. If we say something that isn't perfect that's fine as well.

 

[A///]

Thanks, But NO THANKS..!

While educative it was a stupid stunt. Any future data coming from that publication may be fabricated and should be scrutinized far more than any other publication. Faked cpuid uploads are not new phenomena but they've never been looked at positively when exposed by the leading party.

My ideal AM5 is AMD Ryzen 9 7950 65W CPU!😁💰👍

That's the spirit, Harry. You've found the missing 9 on your keyboard old boy.

Just get the 7950X and put it on ECO Mode..!!

I may have my numbers jumbled up here, but is the 65 watt eco mode not for the dies themselves and not the total package? @Markfw mentioned something about the IOD being a separate number but it only being 12-13 extra watts.

 

[Det0x]

Interesting article:

AMD’s Zen 4, Part 2: Memory Subsystem and Conclusion

Please go through part 1 of our Zen 4 coverage, if you haven’t done so already. This article picks up where the previous one left off. To summarize, Zen 4 has made several moves in the fronte…

chipsandcheese.com

I did some numbers on my own maxed out 7950x system with the same memory benchmark:

Latency:


Dram multicore read bandwidth:

 

[nicalandia]

and where did I mention gaming ?

Don't bother with that type of posters, The 7600X is already beating the 13900K in gaming with good RAM Kits. The 7800X3D will just treat the 13900K like a redheaded stepchild.