Anyway, as I understand it research paper is not specific about what CPU and memory is to be used in an actual future product. But the final product may use a HBM successor such as HBM2, and potentially also x86 cores such as Zen (or a successor). I wonder if it was the fact that it was AMD that published the research paper that made the article in the OP make those assumptions? After all, for AMD those would be the most logical choices.
They discarded HBM2 too, hey, it's exascale. If we had the pieces ready the companies would be designing products, and not researching alternatives.
And the article is really poorly written. Bitsandchips either wanted a click-bait or doesn't have a clue on how to read an article like that.
yeap, you better dont read to much on those specs
Looks like a rehash article from the fake slides. But again, its wccftech. Clickbait.
And of course they are going back. We already know they drop CMT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait
Just a rehash of the same fake stuff from April. From the same time with the other fake slides.
Our well informed industry sources have shared a few more details about the AMD's 2016 Zen cores and not it appears that the architecture won't use the shared FPU like Bulldozer.
The new Zen uses a SMT Hyperthreading just like Intel. They can process two threads at once with a Hyperthreaded core. AMD has told a special few that they are dropping the "core pair" approach that was a foundation of Bulldozer. This means that there will not be a shared FPU anymore.
Zen will use a scheduling model that is similar to Intel's and it will use competitive hardware and simulation to define any needed scheduling or NUMA changes.
Two cores will still share the L3 cache but not the FPU. This because in 14nm there is enough space for the FPU inside of the Zen core and this approach might be faster.
[...]
Zen will apparently be ISA compatible with Haswell/Broadwell style of compute and the existing software will be compatible without requiring any programming changes.
Zen also focuses on a various compiler optimisation including GCC with target of SPECint v6 based score at common compiler settings and Microsoft Visual studio with target of parity of supported ISA features with Intel.
Did you look at the paper? No, you didn't, and it seems that neither did the clowns at bits and chips. AMD doesn't talk about Zen cores and in the case of the memory, they explicitly say that they will not use HBM for this concept. And they don't mention products roadmap at all.
Looks like Fuzdzilla got strong competition.