bitsandchipsAMD Reveals the Monsterous ‘Exascale Heterogeneous Processor’

[Brekyrself]

If HBM is added to an APU, will there be a point where dram is not even required?

Picture a notebook with 4-8gb of HBM? Could this save die space and power getting rid of the ddr4 controller?

 

[AtenRa]

If HBM is added to an APU, will there be a point where dram is not even required?

Picture a notebook with 4-8gb of HBM? Could this save die space and power getting rid of the ddr4 controller?

Tremendously, it will lower the power, heat, space etc. The only problem is you will not be able to increase the memory any further if you need it. But for a laptop, 8GB HBM 2.0 would be fine for the vast majority of users.

 

[Idontcare]

It's not that simple.

Memrom was revolutonary in that not only did it increase IPC substantially from the only recently released Yonah (~20% + even more for heavy SSE) it did so whilst lengthening the pipeline, allowing far greater frequency potential.. and if that wasn't enough, it did it all without using any more power. This meant it could be used from top to bottom - Laptop-enthusiast-server. and dominate them all.

This was beyond expectation, and hasn't repeated since.. (though Sandy bridge was still significant - it came with a node shrink for 4/8c parts which contributed to its advantages over 4/8 Nehalem)

I don't think anyone even remembers what platform-level mumbo jumbo conroe/memrom brought with it (not much I don't think), because it didn't really matter in the shadow of it's performance leap

Good point. When Sandy Bridge debuted no one to recollection ever said "OMG, Intel just Sandy Bridged the market"...unlike the jaw-drop impressiveness of Intel Conroe'ing the market.

 

[Dresdenboy]

Then there was no reason for the post at all. That's like saying "if it doesn't suck it won't suck"

Very good.

If we would apply your logic to this forum, it would become a deserted place.

How often someone throws in one of their preferred good/bad assumptions about a product just to ignite a lengthy discussion with more assumptions thrown at eachother?

 

[Fjodor2001]

Unfortunately, based on this and every other one of your replies, I've come to the conclusion that you just don't have the capacity to understand what i'm saying, despite it being quite literally, spelled out for you. I'm sorry.

I understand very well what you are saying, but do not agree at all. If you read posts on other forums as well, you'll see that most people agree that Skylake certainly is not Intel's "most important architecture in a decade". Noway near I'm afraid.

But maybe we should leave it at that, and return to the actual topic of the thread which is AMD's next gen server CPUs based on Zen.

 

[podspi]

Tremendously, it will lower the power, heat, space etc. The only problem is you will not be able to increase the memory any further if you need it. But for a laptop, 8GB HBM 2.0 would be fine for the vast majority of users.

Especially with Ultrabooks and Ultrabook-like laptops, memory is increasingly soldered on anyway.

Now that I think of it, the last three laptops/portables (one Wintab, a Chromebook, and a Thinkpad of all things) have all had soldered memory, and none of them have more than 4GB(!) of memory. It'll be interesting to see whether mobiles will continue their relentless march forward in specs (including RAM) or whether they will stagnate at 4GB too...

 

[ShintaiDK]

But maybe we should leave it at that, and return to the actual topic of the thread which is AMD's next gen server CPUs based on Zen.

The topic is a research paper, not a product.

 

[mrmt]

But maybe we should leave it at that, and return to the actual topic of the thread which is AMD's next gen server CPUs based on Zen.

Nope, the topic is about a research paper that AMD published, about a research path they are pursuing. It was not a product roadmap, much less a product announcement as you are implying. As far as we know that concept they are pursuing may never see the light of the day because AMD decided to go another path.

 

[Dresdenboy]

AMD, touting moar coars....

Hmm...

You're right. Any GPU compute and increasingly multithreaded software proves them wrong. Intel has shown, that CB single thread score is always higher than the MT score, so more cores are useless, as using cubic power increments allows for even more 1C performance.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Nope, the topic is about a research paper that AMD published, about a research path they are pursuing. It was not a product roadmap, much less a product announcement as you are implying. As far as we know that concept they are pursuing may never see the light of the day because AMD decided to go another path.

You're just stating the obvious. Everything can get cancelled until released.

 

[sm625]

There is no way AMD makes a 32 core cpu with a large gpu. A 4C8T cpu with a large gpu makes sense. As does a 32 core cpu with no gpu.

 

[Atreidin]

I would expect Zen to be faster than Excavator, at least. I have a hard time believing that with all of their shared and licensed IP, and some really good engineers, they aren't going to jump forward. It doesn't even have to be the greatest, just good enough to find a niche with the way they are positioning their product lines.

The negativity I see here makes it sound like AMD is going to somehow accidentally make their new CPUs with 386SX performance and anything more than that is an absurd fantasy.

 

[Enigmoid]

Tremendously, it will lower the power, heat, space etc. The only problem is you will not be able to increase the memory any further if you need it. But for a laptop, 8GB HBM 2.0 would be fine for the vast majority of users.

The problem is that that is RAM + VRAM.

Say you are playing a vram hog game, 2.5 GB Vram + 2.5 GB RAM. Windows uses a couple GB. Pretty much all of your 8 GB shared RAM is used so if you want to have other things open (couple tabs or such) it would be fairly easy to run into problems. Of course you would need a pretty powerful APU to be able to use settings requiring 2.5 GB of vram but if AMD is aiming for this type of APU it is a factor to consider.

8 GB shared is fine for basic use on a laptop, I agree, but for a large APU on the desktop I would be concerned, especially if this APU was launching in a couple years when game requirements are massively increased.

 

[AtenRa]

The problem is that that is RAM + VRAM.

Say you are playing a vram hog game, 2.5 GB Vram + 2.5 GB RAM. Windows uses a couple GB. Pretty much all of your 8 GB shared RAM is used so if you want to have other things open (couple tabs or such) it would be fairly easy to run into problems. Of course you would need a pretty powerful APU to be able to use settings requiring 2.5 GB of vram but if AMD is aiming for this type of APU it is a factor to consider.

8 GB shared is fine for basic use on a laptop, I agree, but for a large APU on the desktop I would be concerned, especially if this APU was launching in a couple years when game requirements are massively increased.

4GB of HBM is enough for 4K today. Even in 2017, 8GB HBM2 for total system memory, for a 1080p laptop, will be more than enough for the vast majority of users.

 

[Enigmoid]

4GB of HBM is enough for 4K today. Even in 2017, 8GB HBM2 for total system memory, for a 1080p laptop, will be more than enough for the vast majority of users.

But we aren't talking about today that is the problem. This system will launch in more than 1 year (likely 2) and to be useful must have some longevity. That is what I am concerned about.

Furthermore, this is total system RAM, not just Vram.

 

[coercitiv]

But we aren't talking about today that is the problem. This system will launch in more than 1 year (likely 2) and to be useful must have some longevity. That is what I am concerned about.

Since it's got you concerned, how much RAM will this system have?

 

[ShintaiDK]

8GB is the norm today. In 2 years it may not be the norm anymore. More likely 16GB.

And 4K with 4GB, ye, not really working well.

 

[AtenRa]

Your HBM2 APU for 1080p will not need more than 2GB for the graphics, that will leave you with 6GB for the rest of the system. That will be plenty for the laptop user even in 2017.

 

[mrmt]

You're just stating the obvious. Everything can get cancelled until released.

Yes, it's a pity that the should be stated like that. You are not talking about an upcoming Zen APU, you are talking about a concept being development that may or may not come to the market at an unknown timeframe.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Your HBM2 APU for 1080p will not need more than 2GB for the graphics, that will leave you with 6GB for the rest of the system. That will be plenty for the laptop user even in 2017.

The current edition of Battlefront for example already got a 6GB minimum for system and 2GB for graphics. And thats a 2015 game. Your 8GB APU will quickly face games it cant even run in 2017.

 

[coercitiv]

The current edition of Battlefront for example already got a 6GB minimum for system and 2GB for graphics. And thats a 2015 game. Your 8GB APU will quickly face games it cant even run in 2017.

That's not entirely accurate:

EA listed the following minimum system requirements for the alpha, and said that they apply only to the alpha, not the final Battlefront game

 

[AtenRa]

yea, there is no game today that needs 6Gb of system ram and i dont expect any in the near future (2017).

 

[2is]

I understand very well what you are saying, but do not agree at all. If you read posts on other forums as well, you'll see that most people agree that Skylake certainly is not Intel's "most important architecture in a decade". Noway near I'm afraid.

But maybe we should leave it at that, and return to the actual topic of the thread which is AMD's next gen server CPUs based on Zen.

You may think you do, but that's looking increasingly unlikely, in fact, I'm positive of it. The fact that what you keep "quoting" in your replies to me is something I've never said, and the fact that I actually acknowledged Intel products can come with their own set of hype, clearly demonstrates you haven't the slightest idea what I'm getting at.

 

[ShintaiDK]

That's not entirely accurate:

Thats why I wrote the current edition. But its unlikely that it will change for retail.

Call of Duty Ghost/Armoured Warfare, Watch Dogs and Witcher 3 also list 6GB as minimum for example.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/292030/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/209160/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/209650/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/243470/

And I am sure I could find more.

yea, there is no game today that needs 6Gb of system ram and i dont expect any in the near future (2017).

But there is, better research next time

 

[Fjodor2001]

8 GB of total system RAM will be totally fine for most use cases at the time when Zen is released.

If there is someone that wants top of the absolute line performance they will by a discrete GPU anyway, just like today. E.g. dGPU with HBM2 + 8 core Zen with whatever amount of RAM you need.

Also, remember that HBM will continue to evolve. If need and market demand arises for future SKUs with more HBM memory, that will come too so there'll be APUs with 16 GB or whatever. 8 GB is not set in stone forever. Heck, we don't even know that's the amount of HBM the APUs will actually have! It might as well be 4 GB, 12 GB, or whatever. Or 4 GB on some SKUs, 12 GB on others.

Just look at the research paper in the OP, where they plan SKUs with 32 GB HBM. Now that is for server use of course and totally overkill for desktop, but eventually it trickles down to desktop too if/when need arises.