Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)

[DisEnchantment]

Speculate at will

 

[branch_suggestion]

The costs are actually driven up by NVidia. Nvidia has the highest margins and is urging TSMC to increase prices. Which does not hurt NVidia, but hurts all NVidia competitors.

NV due to pre purchasing so much supply whether wafers or packaging is being charged extra.
Everyone else is paying a bit less on average for the same stuff.

 

[DrMrLordX]

AMD also tested with 7900XTX instead of 4090 used by most outlets. Keep in mind this can also skew results.

AMD had to send all their 4090s in for RMA for burned-out power connectors. They dug a 7900XTX out of some engineer's kid's machine and benched that.

. . .

Maybe they really are waiting for the 14900K fix so they truly can obliterate them in launch benchmarks.

That's some expensive gamesmanship if true. AMD cost themselves millions (most likely) by stalling the launch.

 

[coercitiv]

AMD had to send all their 4090s in for RMA for burned-out power connectors.

That's just exaggeration, they just couldn't install Nvidia drivers on the 14900K machine(s), install always failed towards the end.

 

[SteinFG]

So after the recent tech brief, it's known that all Zen 5 APUs wil have 16 PCIe lanes. That's 4 less than in Phoenix.

8500G's curse of only 4 GPU lanes will come to 9700G and 9600G.

Edit: Unless they do a thing they did with Cezanne/Renoir, and just left 4 extra PCIe lanes for Desktop only, and fused them off for mobile. Which I doubt, since AMD took out those 4 lanes from strix to minimize power draw.
Edit #2:They didn't do a thing

 

[FlanK3r]

 

[Joe NYC]

So after the recent tech brief, it's known that all Zen 5 APUs wil have 16 PCIe lanes. That's 4 less than in Phoenix.

8500G's curse of only 4 GPU lanes will come to 9700G and 9600G.

Edit: Unless they do a thing they did with Cezanne/Renoir, and just left 4 extra PCIe lanes for Desktop only, and fused them off for mobile. Which I doubt, since AMD took out those 4 lanes from strix to minimize power draw.

I may have missed this. Is anything known about Zen 5 based APUs in AM5 socket or is this just related to the notebook chips?

 

[inf64]

View attachment 103889

Thanks for sharing FlanK3r, that actually makes sense.

 

[tsamolotoff]

It could be that AMD simply does not test SOC chips with anything above JEDEC, which is fairly easy to run, but when the reviewers tried XMP 6000/6400 they've got troubles, who knows.

 

[SteinFG]

I may have missed this. Is anything known about Zen 5 based APUs in AM5 socket or is this just related to the notebook chips?

Date is unknown, but I'm almost certain that it'll use an 8-core Zen 5 Kraken die (Strix is less likely, as almost no one wil buy 12-core R9 9900G with 4+8 configuration and 2 split CCXs)

 

[inf64]

Some interesting info from the Chinese shop owner who posted prices (sorry, link is to wccftech article)

"In addition to the prices, the shopkeeper also shares some of his personal performance metrics & compares the Ryzen 9 9950X, Ryzen 7 9700X & Ryzen 5 9600X against Intel's 14th Gen offerings. He states that the Ryzen 9 9950X offers lower power consumption, lower temperatures, and higher multi-threading performance versus the 14900K with an average 20% performance increase in a wide variety of applications. Without PBO, the gaming performance is said to be 15% ahead of the 14900K.

For the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X, the CPU offers an average 70W power consumption in gaming and runs at around 60-65C using a standard 6-heatpipe air cooler. With PBO, the Ryzen 7 9700X can beat the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and its single-core performance is also higher versus the Intel Core i7-14700K. Lastly, the Ryzen 5 9600X is said to lead over the Core i5-14600K by 10-20% in games and can even outperform the Ryzen 9 9950X in certain titles."

9600X outperforming a much higher boosting 9950x looks like dual CCD vs single CCD issues.

 

[Philste]

Some interesting info from the Chinese shop owner who posted prices (sorry, link is to wccftech article)

Well I got other Infos and I trust them more than just some random Chinese shopowner. Also his gaming data is basically the AMD official data and makes no sense too. 9950X 15% faster than 14900K, but slower than 9600X when 9700X can only beat 7800X3D with PBO. This doesn't add up, same like AMDs 1st Party benchmarks.

 

[MS_AT]

Well I got other Infos and I trust them more than just some random Chinese shopowner. Also his gaming data is basically the AMD official data and makes no sense too. 9950X 15% faster than 14900K, but slower than 9600X when 9700X can only beat 7800X3D with PBO. This doesn't add up, same like AMDs 1st Party benchmarks.

And what do your other sources you trust more say?

 

[Philste]

And what do your other sources you trust more say?

Taxxor, one of the most respected members in Computerbase Forum and Developer of CapframeX (not the one running the Twitter Account) wrote that he have seen benchmarks from partners, where 9900X is 15-20% slower than 7800X3D. Which also means barely faster than Vanilla ZEN4.

Beitrag im Thema 'Gaming-Leistung: Möglich, dass der Ryzen 7 9700X den 7800X3D doch schlägt' https://www.computerbase.de/forum/t...n-7800x3d-doch-schlaegt.2203048/post-29617287

 

[RnR_au]

Taxxor, one of the most respected members in Computerbase Forum and Developer of CapframeX (not the one running the Twitter Account) wrote that he have seen benchmarks from partners, where 9900X is 15-20% slower than 7800X3D. Which also means barely faster than Vanilla ZEN4.

Beitrag im Thema 'Gaming-Leistung: Möglich, dass der Ryzen 7 9700X den 7800X3D doch schlägt' https://www.computerbase.de/forum/t...n-7800x3d-doch-schlaegt.2203048/post-29617287

Maybe this review unit was one of those affected by the soc packaging error?

 

[StefanR5R]

Possible I guess. Still, it would have been better if AMD had disclosed the exact nature of the issue and how an improperly validated CPU was gonna behave because quite a few people out there may have paid full or even more than full price for their CPUs that weren't supposed to be on sale yet and they will live with them and encounter some weird issue and think AMD sucks and the retailer isn't gonna bother about calling the customer to get that CPU back because they already got what they wanted: the customer's cold hard cash!

The two or three people who bought chips from sellers who broke AMD's sales embargo most certainly don't figure into AMD's communications strategy. Not one bit.

Besides, AMD said they recalled the first batch. Thereby these two or three people now know that they ought to get in touch with their seller (who ought to correct his mistake). Likewise, the seller now knows that he needs to inform his two or three customers about the recall. All is fine. AMD gave all the information required, even to those who apparently broke their obligations with AMD.

 

[inf64]

Taxxor, one of the most respected members in Computerbase Forum and Developer of CapframeX (not the one running the Twitter Account) wrote that he have seen benchmarks from partners, where 9900X is 15-20% slower than 7800X3D. Which also means barely faster than Vanilla ZEN4.

Beitrag im Thema 'Gaming-Leistung: Möglich, dass der Ryzen 7 9700X den 7800X3D doch schlägt' https://www.computerbase.de/forum/t...n-7800x3d-doch-schlaegt.2203048/post-29617287

Does that make any sense ? Think logically. I'm not saying it is impossible, but it is very unlikely the data represents retail products. Like others pointed out, there was a reason for the last minute recall.

 

[StefanR5R]

View attachment 103889

That would require that some reviewers were sampled weeks before the planned sampling of other, major reviewers.

While it is possible that tests outside AMD's own were involved, I take issue with the term "reviewers" in this rumor.

Edit, possible, but not overly likely. All points to some sort of mishap with the first production lot(s), be it a defect or insufficient checks for defects. Either way it would be a sort of thing which is arguably more easily discovered by the OSAT's and/or AMD's QA than by external folks who received specimen from that production lot.

 

[Philste]

Does that make any sense ? Think logically. I'm not saying it is impossible, but it is very unlikely the data represents retail products. Like others pointed out, there was a reason for the last minute recall.

It makes as much sense as any other data we have. Don't forget AMDs own benchmarks suite against 5800X3D, which clearly tells that 9700X is ~10% slower than 7800X3D. And that's 1st party benchmarks. So 15% slower in reality sounds reasonable. Apart from that: If all current samples are flawed, how can that random Chinese dude say they are 20% faster?

 

[inf64]

It makes as much sense as any other data we have. Don't forget AMDs own benchmarks suite against 5800X3D, which clearly tells that 9700X is ~10% slower than 7800X3D. And that's 1st party benchmarks. So 15% slower in reality sounds reasonable. Apart from that: If all current samples are flawed, how can that random Chinese dude say they are 20% faster?

Not true according to the same CB tests. 117/112= 1.044 or 4% slower than 7800X3D

 

[yottabit]

I guess another question about Strix Halo is if it will have the full AVX-512 implementation like desktop or the cut down Strix Point style AVX

 

[igor_kavinski]

I guess another question about Strix Halo is if it will have the full AVX-512 implementation like desktop or the cut down Strix Point style AVX

Most likely the latter. AVX-512 isn't used in any game AFAIK so no point in investing in those additional transistors for an APU.

 

[LightningZ71]

I wouldn't be totally surprised if the desktop APUs based on the strix/Kraken generation all use Kraken dies. The 16CU iGPU on Strix Point is even more memory bandwidth bound than Phoenix's 12CUs. Assuming that Kraken retains 8CUs and can clock them higher than Phoenix's 12CUs, the performance difference won't be much different using JEDEC standard, or even vanilla EXPO RAM.

That being said, we all see the growing market for the tiny form factor desktops that can't fit a GPU. Having an efficient APU with lots of cores and a high performance iGPU would certainly give more performance on the top end there. Assuming that they support memory overclocking, I can see the interest there. Without being heavily limited on thermals like a laptop, and having likely no real constraints on power delivery, it should be able to maintain higher clocks for both CPU cores and the iGPU as well. It should be close enough to low end desktop 3050 territory for performance while having more VRAM available.

 

[MS_AT]

Most likely the latter. AVX-512 isn't used in any game AFAIK so no point in investing in those additional transistors for an APU.

And is gaming the intended target or rather creative professionals that want some macbook with Windows? I mean I don't know and we haven't heard anything officially, but it would be a pity to let all this mem bandwidth go to waste

 

[Tuna-Fish]

Apart from that: If all current samples are flawed, how can that random Chinese dude say they are 20% faster?

They don't all need to be flawed for AMD to do a recall. If there was an issue that impacted half all manufactured chips, AMD would absolutely do a recall. They would do so for a lot lower percentage too. It's entirely possible that some of the random chips out there are fully functional.

The part that's sketchy to me is gaining that much from PBO. Recent AMD chips generally have not had a lot of OC headroom.

 

[Josh128]

Agree with Philste that the comments from the Chinese shop owner seem directly taken from AMD's tech day press slides. Only one that seems unique is the 9600X beating 9950X in some games. I wouldnt put much stock into anything he posted.