you're looking at the wrong quarter thoughWhy do you think they keep losing so much of it?
you're looking at the wrong quarter thoughWhy do you think they keep losing so much of it?
exactly, thank you for sparing me the timeWhy would it not be possible to have 10C and 14C with 2 8C dies in MCM.
10C = (3+3) + (2+2)
12C = (3+3) + (3+3)
14C = (4+4) + (3+3)
16C = (4+4) + (4+4)
I think its definitely possible to have 10C and 14C along with 12C and 16C. The flexibility with AMD's MCM approach is really very good.
and where is it stated that two communicating Zeppelins must be symmetrical with each other too?And again, you cannot have 5 or 7 core configs with Zeppelin.
Both CCXs must have the same number of cores enabled, or the other CCXs must be completely disabled.
lolzfail already made that point. No one has done two different core count processors therefore lawyered or something like that. I guess because someone hasn't done it already is enough of a reason to say it can't be done.and where is it stated that two communicating Zeppelins must be symmetrical with each other too?
and where is it stated that two communicating Zeppelins must be symmetrical with each other too?
I am glad you failed to get my point. No, it is far simpler: it makes no sense to do in the first place.lolzfail already made that point. No one has done two different core count processors therefore lawyered or something like that.
ThanksPPR downcoring section.
8C/12C/16C, thats what i think AMD HEDT will be... 10 and 14C seems unlikely.
8C/12C/16C, thats what i think AMD HEDT will be
It does if it allows them a greater spread of price ranges for higher market penetration.I am glad you failed to get my point. No, it is far simpler: it makes no sense to do in the first place.
Yields would have to be atrociously bad to have a 8c
If you were AMD and you had the option to sell two sub $200 R5 1500 or 1400's or sell one $500+ and get someone into the HDET platform?I'm expecting 12c and 16c. Yields would have to be atrociously bad to have a 8c (unless they sacrifice a few 100 chips just to say they have it, which I find unlikely).
I was just thinking this too... the nice thing about Ryzen dies is that AMD can either put them into AM4 or X399 SKUs, and like you say, it's more profitable to put them into HEDT where the margins are higher. Who knows? There might be a sizable market for a high-frequency 8C X399 part where a lot of PCIe lanes are required, like basically an R7 1800X but with more L3 cache and PCIe lanes for those who need it.If you were AMD and you had the option to sell two sub $200 R5 1500 or 1400's or sell one $500+ and get someone into the HDET platform?
I'm expecting 12c and 16c. Yields would have to be atrociously bad to have a 8c (unless they sacrifice a few 100 chips just to say they have it, which I find unlikely).
No.Can a 4 die chip be used in this socket along with a 2 die chip. AMD could salvage crappy ccx complexes into odd ball 10 and 14 chips?
The 8C could be useful, though, given extra I/O and memory channels.
I agree, your naming scheme sounds better but then you would have the problem with the three 12 core CPUs. You would end up with 1960X, 1960 and then something like 1960X+ when the third number is always equal to 1/2 the cores.If these are true and hopefully they wont charge you $$$ like intel does, this just might be my next work station.
However The naming scheme could be abit better.. would have thought something like:
Ryzen 9 1980X, 1970X, 1960X, 1950X sound better than 1998.. almost as bad as Titan Xp.
I agree, your naming scheme sounds better but then you would have the problem with the three 12 core CPUs. You would end up with 1960X, 1960 and then something like 1960X+ when the third number is always equal to 1/2 the cores.
you're looking at the wrong quarter though
I may be one of the biggest AMD fanboys on this forum in terms of what I will buy or promote, but even I have to admit that they are still losing money.