They're all abhorrent things, but MI300 is like ~2.4k mm^2 of active Si which is really-really expensive.MI300 is economical vs H100 or those wafer-scale things, right?
They are buying Bergamo, just that CPU capex is all h2 loaded for them.Favelas could have used the Zen 4c IP already but...
Again, it's an Apple-class core.
That's really what you need to know.
Very simple.
Yes, that's literally where the entire industry is heading.I'm taking it to means that it's a much wider design
Bingo, we're entering prime dark silicon spam era for CPUs.If logic is the only thing that's scaling well, then logic dictates that there should be an increase in logic. It's only logical after all.
Lmao what
Happens, my child.RDOA3 is still too fresh for me to fully trust discord slidewareleakersappreciators again.
Zen4 already sees plenty in the FP area so that's inevitable.I don't think we'll see much dark silicon.
It's just a different core floorplan for a different fmax.like Zen 4c where the design is made as compact as possible will also become more of a focus.
Yea but it's cheap logic, so why not?Wasted space on the newest nodes is almost twice as expensive as the same area on an older node.
Lol, what a deja vu from the Zen 4 rumors: "Zen 3 was 20% - now they got the funding, the 5nm doubles everything, the delay between releases gave them such opportunity!!1!"
Thinking like that brought us current Zen 4.
AMD is all about making economical stuff - they will still need to scale it to 4c APUs based on Zen 5. So those uber-wide cores don't really fit.
Yea it's a bit over what most people expected.In ST the improvement was close to 30% overall.
Some of the wild leaks:The improvement was more than 20%, it s just that the leakers didnt know what was the breakdown between frequency uplift and IPC and went wild in their speculations.
In ST the improvement was close to 30% overall.
They got everything wrong. That the end result was still good says nothing about the quality of the leaks. Especially the ones claiming even higher gains. And of course, they were all oh so confident about it. This hype train happens every gen.The improvement was more than 20%, it s just that the leakers didnt know what was the breakdown between frequency uplift and IPC and went wild in their speculations.
Some of the wild leaks:
The ST improvement varies a lot. 30% is definitely on the higher side tho.
- IPC gains over 25%, a total performance gain of 40% - C&C
- total IPC improvement is a staggering 30% - About 4% of this is minor core optimizations and the rest is entirely the result of the IF and memory overhaul - "AMD eng" Reddit post
- above 20% IPC increase (heard of increase NOTABLY higher) - MLID the clown May 2021
- 15-24% IPC increase / 28-37% ST perf - MLID the clown May 2022
They got everything wrong. That the end result was still good says nothing about the quality of the leaks. Especially the ones claiming even higher gains. And of course, they were all oh so confident about it. This hype train happens every gen.
The claim was 40% ST, not MT. And very specifically >25% IPC gains. That article even claims 5GHz all core. None of these happened.Perf improvement was 37% in MT at Computerbase, so the 40% figure was not far from the final result
Those leakers all claimed to know both. They didn't.whatever if the guy said more IPc and less frequency, i pointed that they didnt knew the breakdown between those two parameters
They were wrong, drastically so. Your attempt to defend them by insisting that one random number they threw out happens to align with a completely different result from real silicon is just absurd. But I'm sure that just as always, when real silicon comes out, the goalposts will move to something else.What i said above is prove that they werent that wrong overall
Ehhh it does 5GHz all-core in lighter loads.That article even claims 5GHz all core
The claim was 40% ST, not MT. And very specifically >25% IPC gains. That article even claims 5GHz all core. None of these happened.
Those leakers all claimed to know both. They didn't.
They were wrong, drastically so. Your attempt to defend them by insisting that one random number they threw out happens to align with a completely different result from real silicon is just absurd. But I'm sure that just as always, when real silicon comes out, the goalposts will move to something else.
So, you're just going to ignore every other claim he made? Or that the other leakers mentioned made in the runup? @yuri69 linked several.Beside do not pump up the numbers, MLID, wich is known for his wild speculations, said 28-37% ST and even more in MT
It was always low teens IPC tops.Not saying Zen 4 is a dud just that expectations were once again higher than reality.
I think the point is that people were generally disappointed when Zen 4 was first given some performance estimates by Lisa Su. The IPC was given as what 8%? Why would that disappoint people so much? Because it is below industry trends, sure, but they compensated for that with clock rate. People had expectations of more IPC from rumors and in some cases expecting there were would be more cores.
Not saying Zen 4 is a dud just that expectations were once again higher than reality.
So, you're just going to ignore every other claim he made? Or that the other leakers mentioned made in the runup? @yuri69 linked several.
At some point this has to be trolling. No reasonable person can defend those predictions.
But I guess this is just part of the pattern. Someone always has to justify why this time the hype train is totally legit.
Your view of how Zen 4/Genoa turned out certainly does not equal mine, or many others. The big difference is that full 100% utilization of Zen 4 cores blows away anything Intel has. No sense in me linking benchmarks, as you would just find a way to twist things to Intel. But I have have log files from WCG and primegrid that shows Genoa/Zen 4 totally dominating anything Intel.So, you're just going to ignore every other claim he made? Or that the other leakers mentioned made in the runup? @yuri69 linked several.
At some point this has to be trolling. No reasonable person can defend those predictions.
But I guess this is just part of the pattern. Someone always has to justify why this time the hype train is totally legit.
Your view of how Zen 4/Genoa turned out certainly does not equal mine, or many others. The big difference is that full 100% utilization of Zen 4 cores blows away anything Intel has. No sense in me linking benchmarks, as you would just find a way to twist things to Intel. But I have have log files from WCG and primegrid that shows Genoa/Zen 4 totally dominating anything Intel.
This being the case, Zen 5 could follow the same line, as "common benchmarks" do not always tell the tale. And benchmarks using watercooling and LN2 do not impress me, as they have no real bearing in reality.
Lets talk when Zen 5 comes out. Or if you want, find some real (as in air cooled and stock ) benchmarks of SR under full 100% sustained load, and I will run the same to prove my point.
Edit: I already posted benchmarks and there is a video that declares Genoa the world record holder in many benchmarks. I have 2 9554 64 core and a 9654 96 core to run them.
I am not sure what you are saying, but cinebench is NOT a real server load, but it does show performance in MT with 100% utilization. I think I am clear in saying Genoa blows away any Intel server chip at stock in sustained 100% load. Oh, and on AIR cooling, no LN2 crap.If we look at the benchmarks at Computerbase what is impressive is not the FP improvement wich is 12/13% for CB R20/R15, it s the 12/15% in 7 Zip and Handbrake, and particularly 7 Zip wich is a good metric to estimate perfs in servers workloads.
Integer related IPC is much more difficult to improve than FP and here everybody seems to think that CB, an Intel optimised bench btw, is the end of all.
As an exemple of Integer and FP IPC evolution if we compare a Core 2 to Haswell the improvement in Cinebench is roughly 60% while in 7 Zip it s a meager 12%...
I am not sure what you are saying, but cinebench is NOT a real server load, but it does show performance in MT with 100% utilization. I think I am clear in saying Genoa blows away any Intel server chip at stock in sustained 100% load. Oh, and on AIR cooling, no LN2 crap.
Edit: and this is what I see for Zen 5 as well, but even more so.
This is a statement of fact. Rumors claimed huge IPC increases that were nowhere close to reality. That says nothing about how good or bad the core is, but it's been a consistent trend with early Zen rumors. There's been some of that on the Intel side too, but people don't seem to run away with it like they do with AMD.Your view of how Zen 4/Genoa turned out certainly does not equal mine, or many others
You mean I'd call you out if you fabricate results, as is your habit? I distinctly recall you accusing people of trolling for reading your own "source" once. So yeah, spare us the farce.No sense in me linking benchmarks, as you would just find a way to twist things to Intel
That's what we're doing about Zen 4 now, a reality check on what happened to the early hype. When Zen 5 is out and the same thing happens, I'm sure there will be people trying to brush it all under the rug in preparation for the Zen 6 hype train. To what end goal, I can't even fathom.Lets talk when Zen 5 comes out