Speculation: Ryzen 3000 series

[DrMrLordX]

If they do launch any Vega 20 (or really any 7 nm dGPUs at CES), it's going to be Frontier Edition expensive; not anything in the price range of the 590.

Indeed. Vega has never been in Polaris' market range, and that isn't going to change next month.

 

[Veradun]

Hector Ruiz, when he was at AMD did exactly what you're proposing (maximized short term gain) and we all know the result of that.

Also known as Hector Ruin

 

[stockolicious]

I never mentioned the reason they sold dirt cheap cpu's. The reason is obvious. They weren't very good and it almost destroyed their business. My point is they aren't going to give away the next generation of Ryzen cpu's like some people here have posted. Why on earth would they sell a 3000 series Ryzen 8 core at the price of a Ryzen 2000 series six core? The answer is thay aren't going to do that.

AMD needs market share - OEM Designs - AMD has struggled to get OEM's to make laptops and PC's -(This is due to a past bad experience with their execution) AMD wants design wins and will stay at the most competitive price they can. Their margins with Ryzen are fine if you look at their revenue growth over the past 18 mos. That growth was mostly through rising ASP's - there was no unit volume spike as DIY market is small and OEM's were very slow in giving them any decent design wins. That goes for the laptop and server market. 2019 looks brighter in this perspective.

 

[Shivansps]

So this is my end of the year speculation on Zen 2...

Lets see what happen i really dont see how else they could do it whiout using a monolithic or a cut down I/O die, they also need to keep compatibility with AM4 and TR4 full I/O... so this is my best guess.

 

[Kedas]

An 8 core monolithic and 16 core monolithic is also an option. (for AM4)
Would only be 2 dies. an 16 core can still be used as 8 core if there is a lot bad.
(APU is something else anyway)

 

[moinmoin]

An 8 core monolithic and 16 core monolithic is also an option. (for AM4)
Would only be 2 dies. an 16 core can still be used as 8 core if there is a lot bad.
(APU is something else anyway)

"Only." 2 dies is already as many dies as AMD had across the whole range of products for Zen 1, going from high end Epyc server to low end Athlon APU.

 

[chrisjames61]

Its called progression, something both Intel and AMD were doing in the past but people have forgotten what PCs used to be the last 5-6 years. Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad to Nehalem to SandyBridge is what we want as consumers and finally we may get it after all those stagnated years.
This is what PC ecosystem used to get every 2 years, its time to return to the old days

Giving away a better product for a discount price isn't "progression". People expect AMD to give away the next generation of Ryzen cpu's. Progression would be selling the next generation 8 core at what the current generation 8 core costs. Why would AMD price the next generation 8 core at what the current generation 6 core sell for?

 

[Kedas]

"Only." 2 dies is already as many dies as AMD had across the whole range of products for Zen 1, going from high end Epyc server to low end Athlon APU.

One die more for a much bigger range of 6 to 16 cores.

There is another way: one 8 core like Ryzen now with everything on it and the option to connect an 8 core epyc chiplet to it, a bit like the 2 extra dies on 32 core threadripper now.
This way it will only be one extra existing die to support AM4 up to 16 cores. (not counting the APU die) gamers will obviously still want to disable that second die if they bought an >8core.

 

[Markfw]

"Only." 2 dies is already as many dies as AMD had across the whole range of products for Zen 1, going from high end Epyc server to low end Athlon APU.

EPYC had 4, 8 core dies, correct ? the 7601 ? and a couple of others.

 

[Kedas]

EPYC had 4, 8 core dies, correct ? the 7601 ? and a couple of others.

No all the same 4x zeppelin die. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/zeppelin
a lot of bad/not used die space


edit: miscommunication here I thought you meant EPYC had 4 and 8 core dies.
hence I said no they are all zeppelin.

 

[Markfw]

No all the same 4x zeppelin die. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/zeppelin
a lot of bad/not used die space

Thats not EPYC, this is and it says right there, "4 dies" https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/epyc/7601

Edit: All Ryzen are one dies (except maybe the 2200/2400?), all threadrippers are 2 dies (except the 4 die 2990wx). EPYC are 2 die or 4 die.

 

[Kedas]

Thats not EPYC, this is and it says right there, "4 dies" https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/epyc/7601

Edit: All Ryzen are one dies (except maybe the 2200/2400?), all threadrippers are 2 dies (except the 4 die 2990wx). EPYC are 2 die or 4 die.

EPYC is always 4 dies like I said before each die has 2 DDR4 channels it's the only way to have 8 memory channels in EPYC1. (but that is history)

Possible zen2:
Ryzen 3000 1 die up to 8 cores including I/O (Die A) same like Ryzen 2000 now.
EPYC2 I/O (Die C) + 8 core chiplets (Die B) (this is already sure)
Ryzen 3000 12 and 16 core: Die A + Die B

 

[jpiniero]

EPYC is always 4 dies like I said before each die has 2 channels it's the only way to have 8 memory channels in EPYC1. (but that is history)

AMD does have a line of Embedded BGA Epyc with one or two dies. The LGA models are all 4 die.

 

[Kedas]

AMD does have a line of Embedded BGA Epyc with one or two dies. The LGA models are all 4 die.

ah yes correct, I forgot about those embedded "Epyc" (but still the same die)

 

[Shivansps]

The problem with the monolithic aproach here is that they now need to create special dies that are only going to be used on desktop, then you need to consider they will also need to add the APUs to that, that will leave you with a Desktop CPU + Desktop APU + TR/EPYC Chiplet + I/O Die + GPU dies + Console APU die.

Thats a lot.

 

[Kedas]

The problem with the monolithic aproach here is that they now need to create special dies that are only going to be used on desktop, then you need to consider they will also need to add the APUs to that, that will leave you with a Desktop CPU + Desktop APU + TR/EPYC Chiplet + I/O Die + GPU dies + Console APU die.

Thats a lot.

now
Desktop CPU + Desktop APU + GPU dies + Console APU die.
next:?
Desktop CPU + Desktop APU + GPU dies + Console APU die + 2 TR/EPYC Dies
So it's only 2 extra dies than before all for the server market they want to invest in.
Still a lot less than what intel is doing and intel will stop saying that EPYC is a desktop die.

 

[moinmoin]

EPYC had 4, 8 core dies, correct ? the 7601 ? and a couple of others.

We were talking about different unique die designs, not the number of dies on an MCM package.
With Zen 1 AMD only had two distinct die designs: the Zeppelin die and the Raven Ridge die, and those covered all different products across the whole range.
Kedas was suggesting 8 core monolithic and 16 core monolithic dies just for AM4.

 

[tamz_msc]

Giving away a better product for a discount price isn't "progression". People expect AMD to give away the next generation of Ryzen cpu's. Progression would be selling the next generation 8 core at what the current generation 8 core costs. Why would AMD price the next generation 8 core at what the current generation 6 core sell for?

If we go by your definition of progression we'd be stuck with 8C/16T CPUs for $1000. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that progression could also mean offering superior products than last-gen at lower than last-gen prices?

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

Because he's happy being ripped off...?

 

[jpiniero]

If we go by your definition of progression we'd be stuck with 8C/16T CPUs for $1000. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that progression could also mean offering superior products than last-gen at lower than last-gen prices?

I think AMD would want (to try at least) to encourage the average DIY sales to be at least in the Intel i5 price range... and not the i3 range it is now. And for sure not the Pentium range.

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

Even so, blowing a big hole into your competitor is a viable option...or at least it would be if AMD could supply all the extra demand that it'd bring.

 

[Kedas]

I just made my vote above to "something else":
8 core monolithic + optional 8 core chiplet (same chiplet as Epyc)
Only one IF connection on the Ryzen 3000 die instead of now 3.

edit: because it makes no sense to use two dies for a low budget CPU, and an 16 core monolithic seems too costly, this above allows chiplets for high end CPU and 1 die for the low end. With only 1 desktop die and reuse of the 8 core chiplet of epyc for >8 cores.
(or connect a GPU die for consoles)

 

[tamz_msc]

I think AMD would want (to try at least) to encourage the average DIY sales to be at least in the Intel i5 price range... and not the i3 range it is now. And for sure not the Pentium range.

Not sure how you're arriving at those numbers, but using Mindfactory.de data, it seems like ASPs are closer to 200€, which is just shy of i5 territory. There is definitely room for a larger spread around that region with next-gen products, even if you add $30 to the pricing of the "leaks".

 

[amd6502]

Just thought of it, that a smaller chiplet driver could come with both a small iGPU and a mode to disable the iGPU and use its memory lanes to drive a second chiplet. If so, this would make both the modular 8c APU option as well as the 8-16c CPU option true. If they can pre-bin the chiplets I really doubt they would use two working 8c chiplets for an AM4 CPU; they might however use 6c salvage dies for an "elite" AM4 CPU. Such an option would add transistor and IO area and perimeter, so it's not too likely.

 

[chrisjames61]

If we go by your definition of progression we'd be stuck with 8C/16T CPUs for $1000. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that progression could also mean offering superior products than last-gen at lower than last-gen prices?

Your analogy makes no sense and is a strawman. We aren't talking about Intel and their recent monopoly of workstation cpu's. Please answer why you would sell a next gen 8 core at the price of the previous gen 6 core? AMD aren't going to do that. They are looking to make money and have decent profit margins. Not give cpu's away.